Due Process Will Take 200 Years (1 Viewer)

[CaughtInThe]

I vaguely remember a bipartisan border deal.

 

[Lutherf]

A) Who says they are?

B) That’s is why there are THREE COEQUAL BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. Congress and state houses can legislate to effect change the people want.

Making Trump King doesn’t solve your problem, if it exists to begin with, it exacerbates it to the power of *WHOOPS, THERE GOES OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC*.

What do the civically challenged among us not get about that?

Three what kind of branches? What was that word you used? "Coequal"? Does that mean that all branches have off setting authority or that one branch simply dominates them all? If it's the former then why is the judiciary giving ZERO consideration of Executive authority?

 

[Redress]

The effect is the same. No deportations can be effected until the court gives the OK. If they never give the OK then no deportations.

The case is pending before the 5th Circuit. Stop with the over the top drama over a temporary order. Just because you think the president should have unlimited power does not mean our governmental system does not have limits on those powers. The courts can and should determine whether a president is following the law properly.

 

[Jetboogieman]

None of this makes a lick of difference any more since SCOTUS ruled that Trump can't deport gang members whether they are terrorists or not. At this point it looks like the courts are going to simply declare everyone that has ever set foot on US soil to be a lawful citizen and ineligible for deportation under any circumstance whatsoever.

I am President Trump.

I declare you illegal and I declare you are a terrorist.

What?

You think you're allowed to argue your case?

Are you one of millions of Americans without access to a birth certificate or passport? (not that, that would even matter if we declare you illegal and a terrorist and push you out without any due process).

Too bad.

See yah.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Three what kind of branches? What was that word you used? "Coequal"? Does that mean that all branches have off setting authority or that one branch simply dominates them all? If it's the former then why is the judiciary giving ZERO consideration of Executive authority?

That’s not how it works and if you had civics in school tears not how it behaves when it works. The coequal branches BALANCE the weaknesses of the others by CHECKS TO POWER. No one branch runs the show.

The point is that it’s not working.

However, IF you think naming an all powerful Executive makes any if that better… if you don’t know that only makes it worse, than you don’t understand our Constitutional Republic, how it’s suppose to work, or how to actually fix it.

You are part of the problem and not the solution.

The solution is to get the money out of our politics. Make the elected responsible to their electorates and not the money. Rebalance the three branches of government, our economic classes, and the power shared between them.

THAT IS THE FIX. SHARING OF POLITICAL POWER. BETWEEN OUR BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. BETWEEN OUR ECONOMIC CLASSES.

 

[Lutherf]

I am President Trump.

I declare you illegal and I declare you are a terrorist.

What?

You think you're allowed to argue your case?

Are you one of millions of Americans without access to a birth certificate or passport? (not that, that would even matter if we declare you illegal and a terrorist and push you out without any due process).

Too bad.

See yah.

These people ARE here illegally and, if members of a gang designated a terrorist organization, ARE terrorists.

 

[Jetboogieman]

These people ARE here illegally and, if members of a gang designated a terrorist organization, ARE terrorists.

You are here illegally.

You are part of a gang.

That gang has been designated as a terrorist organization.

I am the President.

I declare it.

It is so.

 

[Lutherf]

That’s not how it works and if you had civics in school tears not how it behaves when it works. The coequal branches BALANCE the weaknesses of the others by CHECKS TO POWER. No one branch runs the show.

The point is that it’s not working.

However, IF you think naming an all powerful Executive makes any if that better… if you don’t know that only makes it worse, than you don’t understand our Constitutional Republic, how it’s suppose to work, or how to actually fix it.

You are part of the problem and not the solution.

The solution is to get the money out of our politics. Make the elected responsible to their electorates and not the money. Rebalance the three branches of government, our economic classes, and the power shared between them.

THAT IS THE FIX. SHARING OF POLITICAL POWER. BETWEEN OUR BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. BETWEEN OUR ECONOMIC CLASSES.

What's happening is that the courts are imposing THEIR will on the Executive authority which is granted ONLY to the president. The AEA is implemented by the president. He doesn't need Judicial or Legislative approval to invoke the Act and if anyone takes issue with him invoking the Act the appropriate action is impeachment, not some district court judge, or even the Supreme Court, saying, "You can't do that". The Executive ALSO gets due process and in this situation that due process is being ignored by the courts.

 

[Lutherf]

You are here illegally.

You are part of a gang.

That gang has been designated as a terrorist organization.

I am the President.

I declare it.

It is so.

If you don't like it then impeach him.

 

[upsideguy]

Three what kind of branches? What was that word you used? "Coequal"? Does that mean that all branches have off setting authority or that one branch simply dominates them all? If it's the former then why is the judiciary giving ZERO consideration of Executive authority?

Not true .... but the are slapping the executive for exceeding his authority by over-running due process, which is the job of the courts.

The POTUS should abide by the law. When it pushes the limits of the law, its the role of the judiciary to slap him (figurative speaking).... A real American president would not be butt-hurt, but re-group and get the job done by respecting due process. I am surprised you don't understand this.

 

[Jetboogieman]

If you don't like it then impeach him.

WTF lol!

So your answer to the President having unlimited power and having an issue with it...

Is Impeach him?

I declare that, ****ing stupid.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

What's happening is that the courts are imposing THEIR will on the Executive authority

Because you say do?

It’s only because you disagree. Those that agree with what the courts are advocating believe those courts are exercising their CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF JUDICIAL REVIEW in clipping Executive or Legislative overreach.

So it is a matter of what you personally believe. NOT whether the courts are going too far. They are acting within the realm of the Constitutional framework that created all three branches.

 

[Lutherf]

Because you say do?

It’s only because you disagree. Those that agree with what the courts are advocating believe those courts are exercising their CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF JUDICIAL REVIEW in clipping Executive or Legislative overreach.

So it is a matter of what you personally believe. NOT whether the courts are going too far. They are acting within the realm of the Constitutional framework that created all three branches.

Right. Those that agree with the courts are doing so because they hate Trump and don't give a flying **** about right and wrong as long as whatever it is hurts Trump. Those that agree with the courts are completely willing to burn the entire country to the ground as long as Trump gets a fistful of "**** You!".

 

[roughdraft274]

The effect of the SCOTUS ruling is that the president has no authority to enforce the AEA and also created a standard whereby declaring the AEA to bee in effect requires judicial review. With this ruling Roberts effectively said that even if we have armed combatants on the streets of our cities that the president MUST NOT take action against them until some circuit court judge gives him the OK and that can't happen until after a case has been filed, after a trial has been had and after all parties have had their appeal hearing. Furthermore, he's saying that if Trump brings ANY case to the Supreme Court that they will deny him because Trump.

So you lied about what it actually said so now you are just pretending that it does actually do what you claim even though it doesn't say it.

**** me dude. How many red pills did you swallow?

 

[Lutherf]

Not true .... but the are slapping the executive for exceeding his authority by over-running due process, which is the job of the courts.

The POTUS should abide by the law. When it pushes the limits of the law, its the role of the judiciary to slap him (figurative speaking).... A real American president would not be butt-hurt, but re-group and get the job done by respecting due process. I am surprised you don't understand this.

The administration IS NOT dismissing due process. What's happening is that all of you and the courts want some kind of process of their own creation instead of what's already statutorily defined.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Right. Those that agree with the courts are doing so because they hate Trump and don't give a flying **** about right and wrong as long as whatever it is hurts Trump. Those that agree with the courts are completely willing to burn the entire country to the ground as long as Trump gets a fistful of "**** You!".

No. Most of those that agree do so on philosophical/political points 9f order and couldn’t care iess about Trump other than he distorts the balance and breaks things further than they are broken already.

What’s right is ETHICALLY SOUND, and if you can look at Trump’s life and see him representative if anything ethically sound you have a warped notion of right vs. wrong and we need to discuss that before we get into anything else.

I don’t know what MAGA misses about that? You don’t hire the alligator to fix the swamp. The alligator is of the swamp and just makes the swamp swampier. TRUMP IS A VERY BIG ALLIGATOR.

 

[JerryW]

if members of a gang designated a terrorist organization

IF. That word is kinda key. Some LEO or even the president of the USA saying you are such a member, that claim is not sufficient proof according to the courts and the US Constitution.

 

[Lutherf]

IF. That word is kinda key. Some LEO or even the president of the USA saying you are such a member, that claim is not sufficient proof according to the courts and the US Constitution.

The "if", when it comes to Garcia, was adjudicated not once but twice. He's a gang member.

It's looking more and more like most of you are less interested in due process and more interested in validating your own preconceived notions about Trump.

 

[j brown's body]

There is a very good, practical reason for supporting due process for foreigners. Because as long as they have them, we have them.

When people lose their rights, it begins with foreigners, or people considered foreigners.

Don't let it happen here.

 

[j brown's body]

The "if", when it comes to Garcia, was adjudicated not once but twice. He's a gang member.

It's looking more and more like most of you are less interested in due process and more interested in validating your own preconceived notions about Trump.

The current judge says the government has provided no such evidence.

 

[j brown's body]

These people ARE here illegally and, if members of a gang designated a terrorist organization, ARE terrorists.

Used to be the Commies.

Old wine, new bottles.

 

[JerryW]

The "if", when it comes to Garcia, was adjudicated not once but twice. He's a gang member.

It's looking more and more like most of you are less interested in due process and more interested in validating your own preconceived notions about Trump.

There are court documents that say there is no evidence to the gang membership claim & they come after the gang claims. Trump seems to have contradictory evidence.

The resolution requires a formal hearing. So no, for me it is 100% due process. You are reading rather imaginatively is you see something other than that in my comment here. (Unless you are thinking of Juan Garcia Abrego.)

PS: you have shifted this from the initial topic ....

 

[dairyair]

Three what kind of branches? What was that word you used? "Coequal"? Does that mean that all branches have off setting authority or that one branch simply dominates them all? If it's the former then why is the judiciary giving ZERO consideration of Executive authority?

They are giving consideration of executive authority.
That's what the ruling is doing.
Checks and balances within the constitution and the laws. Afterall, isn't MAGA all about Law and Order? At least voiced publicly.

What do you think? Does MAGA care about law and order? The constitution?

I bet you may not be able to answer.

 

[dairyair]

These people ARE here illegally and, if members of a gang designated a terrorist organization, ARE terrorists.

Prove that?
Oh wait, we don't need to have proof for the law and order people.

 

[notquiteright]

None of this makes a lick of difference any more since SCOTUS ruled that Trump can't deport gang members whether they are terrorists or not. At this point it looks like the courts are going to simply declare everyone that has ever set foot on US soil to be a lawful citizen and ineligible for deportation under any circumstance whatsoever.

tRumpakins can't help themselves. They grinned from ear to ear when the new justices went back on their word about Roe v Wade and tanked it.
Now they whine when these same Justices say proof before deportation. The Orange 'King' can deport terrorists and gang members, but the masked men abduct people off the street and whisk them away to who knows where. Teenagers are denied entry because they didn't have every day of their stay booked. A man with a birth certificate is seized. A Frenchman is denied entry because the custom agents seized his phone and found critical comments about 'Dear Leader'. There is zero proof the man from Maryland is/was/might be a gang member....
Pretending tRump is always correct and his goons are only seizing legit gang members and terrorists is as foolish as believing his tariffs are genius and his on again off again use of them isn't being exploited by his MAGA henchmen.....