• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge Boasberg cancels planned hearing to review Trump deportations

soap box said:
(Why can't trump have the patience to accomplish his goals without a mess?)



I already agreed. Scotus didn't say he couldn't use AEA again, they added habeus as a step to be included, as you post here later. I didn't post to criticize the AEA.
Click to expand...
so what is the gist of the debate here?
soap box said:
But neither you or I can be sure any particular and individual prisoner in El Salvador is or isn't affiliated with Maduro+
Click to expand...
An individual is part of the gang/foreign terrorist org. that Maduro is using as a "predatory incursion".. Those tats ain't just for shits and giggles. The FTO is an enemy of the USA
Boasberg had no jurisdiction to take the case. It should have been filed in Tx where the TdA were detained.
Boasberg closed his case because of the fact the AEA is a Constitutional act, and he had no jurisdiction as a DC judge
SCOTUS says a habeus hearing is all that is needed ( favors the prosecution unless the defendant can show he is not deportable)
soap box said:
Scotus won't require something if they fear trump will not do it. ​

This case is a test of checks and balances that failed already. So yeah, I guess trump won.
Click to expand...
The checks and balances couldn't be clearer with Trump exercising Article 2 powers, and SCOTUS rectifying the issue.
The problem is the District Judges who act like super-legislators.
 
anatta said:
so what is the gist of the debate here?

An individual is part of the gang/foreign terrorist org. that Maduro is using as a "predatory incursion".. Those tats ain't just for shits and giggles. The FTO is an enemy of the USA
Click to expand...
Three weeks ago they didn't distinguish that and it's beside the point. The government can't abduct people.

anatta said:
Boasberg had no jurisdiction to take the case. It should have been filed in Tx where the TdA were detained.
Boasberg closed his case because of the fact the AEA is a Constitutional act, and he had no jurisdiction as a DC judge
Click to expand...
You'll have to quote the court opinion where it says anything about the constitution regarding Boasberg. They claimed it was geographic.

"Challenges to removal under the AEA, a statute which largely ‘preclude judicial review must be brought in habeas,’” the majority said, citing several prior court decisions. “For ‘core habeas petitions,’ ‘jurisdiction lies in only one district: the district of confinement.’ The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia.”

Alien Enemies Act case heads to federal court in Texas | Constitution Center

A divided Supreme Court on Monday night sent a high-profile case to Texas from Washington, D.C., involving a dispute over Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to deport alleged gang members.
constitutioncenter.org

anatta said:
SCOTUS says a habeus hearing is all that is needed ( favors the prosecution unless the defendant can show he is not deportable)
Click to expand...
And the habeus hearings never happened three weeks ago and while some are guilty as you've posted we don't know how many. Simply, there was no process and trump saw no problem in that.

anatta said:
The checks and balances couldn't be clearer with Trump exercising Article 2 powers, and SCOTUS rectifying the issue.
The problem is the District Judges who act like super-legislators.
Click to expand...

You can trust trump to obey Scotus but I won't.
 
soap box said:
Three weeks ago they didn't distinguish that and it's beside the point. The government can't abduct people.
Click to expand...
The government can use law to detain and remove those whom are subject to the AEA as confirmed by SCOTUS
soap box said:
You'll have to quote the court opinion where it says anything about the constitution regarding Boasberg. They claimed it was geographic.
Click to expand...
Jurisdictional is the term ..geographic is acceptable as well.
you just quoted that part of the decision
For ‘core habeas petitions,’ ‘jurisdiction lies in only one district: the district of confinement.’ The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia.”
Click to expand...
going forward as well
soap box said:
And the habeus hearings never happened three weeks ago and while some are guilty as you've posted we don't know how many. Simply, there was no process and trump saw no problem in that.
Click to expand...
there was plenty of process. I started a thread where ICE uses a scale of points for identifying removal

Alien Enemies Act: Alien Enemy Validation Guide

https://www.newsweek.com/tren-de-aragua-membership-ice-points-system-alien-enemies-act-2053165 Among the filings from the ACLU submitted Friday was "Exhibit S," which included a form entitled "Alien Enemies Act: Alien Enemy Validation Guide," which is allegedly being used by federal agents to...
debatepolitics.com
soap box said:
You can trust trump to obey Scotus but I won't.
Click to expand...
So far Trump 47 hasn't had any contempt charges laid on him by any court
 

The left's trying like hell to regain some iota of power.......sorry, back to the Peanut Gallery with ya!
 

It’s interesting. Three quarters of the objections were upheld. One wasn’t. But this is a great victory. Or something.

Trump can use the act to deport people. But he can’t just load them on a plane. He has to give them notice to file motions before the court. In other words, Trump has to be able to prove they are members of this gang. Further he has to show what crimes they have committed to be considered dangerous criminals.

Trump can’t just say they are. Trust us. We know. No we don’t need to prove anything.

That is practically stopping the thing right now.

So instead of one activist judge, now you all will be blaming activist judges all over the nation who won’t let Trump do this.
 
anatta said:
The government can use law to detain and remove those whom are subject to the AEA as confirmed by SCOTUS
Click to expand...
With due process.

anatta said:
Jurisdictional is the term ..geographic is acceptable as well.
you just quoted that part of the decision
Click to expand...
That part says it was NOT a constitutional question. The ruling did NOT say anything about the judge's constitutional authority to rule on federal cases because it's clear he can.

anatta said:
going forward as well
Click to expand...
With due process.


Now there will be, but the case is about the lack of due process that the administration attempted.

anatta said:
So far Trump 47 hasn't had any contempt charges laid on him by any court
Click to expand...

He has defied the rulings of many courts already.
They won't defy him Because that would lead to a constitutional crisis. I said the courts will not require anything they fear trump will not do. We have lost checks and balances.
 
Fletch said:
See the SC ruling. Boasberg had no jurisdiction here.
Click to expand...
To clarify, Scotus said the case will be moved to Texas because that's where the defendants were detained. The judge is fully authorized to rule on federal cases.

"Challenges to removal under the AEA, a statute which largely ‘preclude judicial review must be brought in habeas,’” the majority said, citing several prior court decisions. “For ‘core habeas petitions,’ ‘jurisdiction lies in only one district: the district of confinement.’ The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia.”
 
WorldWatcher said:
No need, some people are sure all brown people are gang members.

We're good.

WW
Click to expand...
And, some people like the Wise Latina on the SCOTUS bench believe a brown complexion gives superior judgement.
 
anatta said:
hey hey good bye now. ****ing activists judges gotta get pruned
Click to expand...
Nobody got "pruned", the judge is simply continuing to apply the relevant laws as written in the face of a federal government desperately seeking to circumvent them for political purposes.
 
HonestJoe said:
Nobody got "pruned", the judge is simply continuing to apply the relevant laws as written in the face of a federal government desperately seeking to circumvent them for political purposes.
Click to expand...
Boasberg isnt applying anything. he shut the case down
 
anatta said:
Boasberg isnt applying anything. he shut the case down
Click to expand...
Well, at the moment he's apparently just postponed a single hearing pending the details of the Supreme Court ruling but if that ruling stands he will likely deny the case before him due to the jurisdictional ruling. That isn't necessarily the end of the case since further cases could be filed in what have been deemed the correct jurisdictions (I believe some already have) and the SCOTUS ruling also apparently clarifies the requirement for the administration to give a suitable level of due process to their deportation suspects. There is also the legitimate consideration of contempt of court judgements that would remain very much within Boasberg's jurisdiction.

So again, nobody getting "pruned", just the legitimate application of the legal process (which I appreciate may be confusing to you).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…