Trump Administration Predictions (3 Viewers)

We also see the Logan Act potentially being violated by Chris Van Hollen. As a senator, he has no authority to represent the executive branch. The Constitution assigns foreign affairs to the executive branch, not the legislative.
 
RogerCooper said:
as there is no invasion or incursion
Click to expand...

It is to laugh. If 13,000 people per day were illegally crossing the border and many (admittedly, not all) of them were thugs, criminals, and violent gang members, I think either invasion or incursion would apply. For the Abrego-Garcia case, he WON in court because the 9-0 SCOTUS decision made it clear that a judge has no business interfering in USA interactions with foreign sovereign nations. The "facilitate" simply means that if El Salvador wants to eject him, the USA would send a plane to pick him up.

RogerCooper said:
The question of "OR" or "AND" is not relevant, as there is no invasion or incursion
Click to expand...

Hate to tell you how many decisions depended on whether OR or AND was used.
 
The_Doc_Man said:
It is to laugh. If 13,000 people per day were illegally crossing the border and many (admittedly, not all) of them were thugs, criminals, and violent gang members, I think either invasion or incursion would apply. For the Abrego-Garcia case, he WON in court because the 9-0 SCOTUS decision made it clear that a judge has no business interfering in USA interactions with foreign sovereign nations. The "facilitate" simply means that if El Salvador wants to eject him, the USA would send a plane to pick him up.



Hate to tell you how many decisions depended on whether OR or AND was used.
Click to expand...
You are talking about invasion as metaphor. Laws are not metaphors. Congress has not declared war on Venezuela. There are no Venezuela armed forces occupying American territory. The interpretation of laws is up to the Courts, not the President.
 
AccessBlaster said:
We also see the Logan Act potentially being violated by Chris Van Hollen. As a senator, he has no authority to represent the executive branch. The Constitution assigns foreign affairs to the executive branch, not the legislative.
Click to expand...
The Logan act is of dubious constitutionality and no one has every been convicted under it. Nor does the President have exclusive say on foreign affairs, which is why both houses of Congress have foreign affairs committees.
 
RogerCooper said:
The interpretation of laws is up to the Courts, not the President.
Click to expand...

Yet if you don't do something to raise the issue, the courts that have sufficient authority to answer the question don't have the right of original review. So if you don't test the law, you can't know what it actually says in practical terms.
 
Isaac said:
IMO unless the person has done some absolutely dastardly thing --- generally speaking, a crime of some kind.
Click to expand...
How about abusing his wife. He was arrested twice for that? And she is now afraid to talk about her complaints so she evades the questions.
 
The_Doc_Man said:
Yet if you don't do something to raise the issue, the courts that have sufficient authority to answer the question don't have the right of original review. So if you don't test the law, you can't know what it actually says in practical terms.
Click to expand...
The President (like every other Federal employee elected or not) swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, not see what he get away with. It is not just the courts who should be enforcing the Constitution, but everyone.

If Trump wants expedited deportation procedure, he needs to go to Congress for that. However, deportation without a hearing is always going to violate the due process clause.
 
In the case of Abrego-Garcia, he had not one but TWO hearings that resulted in declaring him to be an MS-13 gang member AND in issuing a proper deportation order. He HAD his due process. The declaration of MS-13 as a terror organization voided the order delaying his deportation pending an asylum hearing. There IS no asylum for a member of a terror organization. In his case, you are advocating delaying tactics to prevent execution of lawful deportation orders. You say he wasn't here long enough. I say he was here too long.

Some of the other cases bother me more, such as actions against Muslims who participated in rallies. As dangerous as extremist Islam can be, there is a question regarding free speech.
 
The_Doc_Man said:
In the case of Abrego-Garcia, he had not one but TWO hearings that resulted in declaring him to be an MS-13 gang member AND in issuing a proper deportation order. He HAD his due process. The declaration of MS-13 as a terror organization voided the order delaying his deportation pending an asylum hearing. There IS no asylum for a member of a terror organization. In his case, you are advocating delaying tactics to prevent execution of lawful deportation orders. You say he wasn't here long enough. I say he was here too long.

Some of the other cases bother me more, such as actions against Muslims who participated in rallies. As dangerous as extremist Islam can be, there is a question regarding free speech.
Click to expand...
"Immigration Judges" are not members of the judicial branch, so a hearing with an immigration judge is not sufficient to meet due process requirements. He is entitled argue before an actual court that he is not a member of MS-13.

The designation of MS-13 as a terrorist organization is also subject to judicial review. Criminal gangs are not normally considered terrorist organizations. For example, the Mafia is not designated as such. (Maybe it should).
 
AccessBlaster said:
See if this helps.

Kilmar Armando Abrego-Garcia's 2019 immigration proceedings case# A 208 924 236.

Initial Bond Proceedings Order (May 22, 2019): https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69777799/11/1/abrego-garcia-v-noem/
Withholding of Removal Order (October 10, 2019): https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69777799/1/1/abrego-garcia-v-noem/
Board of Immigration Appeals Bond Proceedings Order (December 19, 2019): https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69777799/11/2/abrego-garcia-v-noem/
Click to expand...
Interesting. Note despite the use of the term "judge" this decision is not from an actual judge but an executive branch employee.
 
Judge Elizabeth A. Kessler

Judge Kessler was appointed as an Immigration Judge in January 2006. She received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1987 from Columbia University; a Master of Arts degree in International Relations 1992 from Yale Graduate School ; and a Juris Doctorate in 1992 from Yale Law School.


Judge David M. Jones is a member of the Utah State Bar and has been serving as a supervisory immigration court judge since March 2019. He oversees the Baltimore Immigration Court and has also handled cases at the Hyattsville Immigration Court. During fiscal years 2019 through 2024, he decided 374 asylum claims on their merits, granting asylum for 267 and denying relief to 106, resulting in a denial rate of 28.3 percent.8 This is notably lower than the national average denial rate of 57.7 percent for the same period.
 
Last edited:
Due process is being used by the left as a red herring. Even Dershowitz stated (paraphrased) that if you cannot prove US citizenship you can be immediately deported.

Kilmar Armando Abrego-Garcia's has no right to be here and should have been deported. Moreover Biden let millions in without due process. So it is absurd for Democrats to now use the concept of due process.

Note that the Democrats who are so concerned about Garcia have not gone to Gaza to appeal for the release of the hostages there. The Democrats are into performance art and virtue signaling. They don't believe in the law.
 
Steve R. said:
Due process is being used by the left as a red herring. Even Dershowitz stated (paraphrased) that if you cannot prove US citizenship you can be immediately deported.

Kilmar Armando Abrego-Garcia's has no right to be here and should have been deported. Moreover Biden let millions in without due process. So it is absurd for Democrats to now use the concept of due process.

Note that the Democrats who are so concerned about Garcia have not gone to Gaza to appeal for the release of the hostages there. The Democrats are into performance art and virtue signaling. They don't believe in the law.
Click to expand...
They lost the presidency over the immigration issue, yet they keep focusing on the 80-20 issues. Trump has a clear mandate, and it frustrates them.
 
AccessBlaster said:
They lost the presidency over the immigration issue, yet they keep focusing on the 80-20 issues. Trump has a clear mandate, and it frustrates them.
Click to expand...
The Democrats, unfortunately "won" with Brown and Floyd. They are trying to re-live that success.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Trump Not Happy, Declares to End Relations with Traditional American Allies.
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
1,640
Pat Hartman
P
Steve R.
Judicial Tyranny
2
Replies
26
Views
630
The_Doc_Man
The_Doc_Man
Steve R.
Clueless Republicans
Replies
14
Views
636
Isaac
Isaac
Steve R.
Lion Electric, the New Solyndra
Replies
7
Views
199
Pat Hartman
P
Cotswold
Sly and Sneaky Starmer's Latest Ego Trip.
2 3
Replies
45
Views
1,358
Isaac
Isaac

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Total: 4 (members: 2, guests: 2)
    Back
    Top Bottom