Trump says US cannot give every person it wants to deport a trial (2 Viewers)

[TomFitz]

Funny thing is that if the accused shows up he de facto guilty of being In the US without papers.

The “accused” has never been accused of anything.

But has been condemned by Trump and his facist racist followers.

 

[TomFitz]

Wow...I mean this is so laughably bad I cannot even be my normally snarky, sardonic self. Please read some actual history. There was NO Supreme Court in Britain at the time you speak. The crown dispensed justice at the time and the arbiter of justice was the Kings Bench which was headed by appointed nobles from the King to dispense the King's Justice. Civil matters were headed up by the Lord Chancellor of England...again appointed by the King. The final arbiter was the King himself.

To suggest that British subjects had no rights is just as wrong. Those rights were not guaranteed by a Constitution but never the less existed in legislation and common law practice. They included the right to religious freedom, the right to local representative government, the right to a fair trial and the right and the right not to be taxed without consent by parliamentary representation. Amongst other things like habeus corpus. Too much to into but they had rights. To suggest otherwise is to be ignorant.

The anti-Fedralist did not oppose the Constitution because of fear of judicial overreach. They were afraid of a strong central government that could supplant states and individual rights. That is why we have a Bill of Rights.

Please read some actual history this is ridiculously bad.

Excellent post!

I was going to take that BS on, but I had something more important to do at the moment.

Trumpsters don’t know or understand what common law is. Much less the fact that it is the foundation of American jurisprudence.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

So if Trump gave the courts 2 hours before deporting them that should provide the courts with ample opportunity to give these poor victims their due process?

If someone has been here years or decades then they should get a hearing.

 

[Peter]

Why bother with courts at all?

Think of the savings if Trump can just declare vast bunches of people guilty with a swipe of a pen?

 

[Napoleon]

The AEA sets two conditions under which a President is empowered to take action under the AEA:

1. We are in a declared war. Only Congress has the authority to declare war.
2. A foreign nation or government invades the US. Designating a criminal organization as terrorist does not magically convert them to a foreign nation or government.

A lot to unpack here.

The AEA was passed in 1798 - a time when warfare was a lot more formal and organized than it is today. We are no longer donning powdered wigs, meeting with the armies of nation-States on an open field in three months time (because that’s how long it took for the enemy to get here), and exchanging volleys until someone wins. Likewise, Congress doesn’t do formal declarations of war anymore.

In its wisdom, Congress decided a long time ago that the modern President needs a freer hand to exercise his war powers. In lieu of “war” we now have “hostilities” and “use of force.” The President can exercise his war powers by ordering the armed forces to engage in “hostilities” for up to 90 days after which time a congressional authorization for “use of force” is needed. But these are all words describing the same thing.

In that vein, SCOTUS was clear in Ludecke v. Watkins that the President’s determination that a state of war exists and following decision to invoke the AEA are not subject to judicial review. But they followed that holding by walking through some technicalities for why one might consider WWII to be ongoing simply as a courtesy to the plaintiff so he would at least have an explanation. One can use that same methodology of technicalities to justify what the Trump Administration is doing.

The open ended AUMF for the global war on terrorism constitutes a congressional declaration of war. The designation of cartels as terrorist organizations brings them and those the President determines to be their associates into the fold of that declaration and allows the President to deport them under the AEA without judicial review of those decisions.

SCOTUS also pointed out in the same decision that there is no Judicial Branch remedy for an abuse of power under the AEA precisely because the Judicial Branch has no Constitutional authority to scrutinize the Presidents invocation and actions under it. They held that only remedy is for the people to elect a different President next time around. So there is no recourse for what the Trump Administration is doing unless and until the current SCOTUS overturns Ludecke v. Watkins.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

So if Trump gave the courts 2 hours before deporting them that should provide the courts with ample opportunity to give these poor victims their due process?

NO.

That's why the Supreme Court agreed to put everything on hold.

2 hours notice isn't sufficient time to do anything.

And you can't file a writ of habeas corpus if you're in a detention facility, or in a bus being transferred to a plane, and it's a Friday night and the courts are closed, and the document you've been given is in English and you can't understand because you speak Spanish.

It's ridiculous. And you can't imagine what it's like because you don't think they are human beings.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

I believe Trump is arguing the 3rd option, predatory incursion.

BY A foreign government.

An incursion BY a foreign government. Read the text.

Are you suffering from racism-induced dyslexia too?

 

[W_Heisenberg]

If Donald Trump actually wanted to do mass deportations, he could 1) expand immigration courts, and 2) focus on the most straightforward cases that won't take more than 1-2 hearings before deportation.

Instead, he chooses to bitch and moan that the courts are following the Constitution.

It's because he wants the power to deport people without due process.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Courts don't have the authority to decide political questions, only legal ones. The courts are flushing their reputation down the toilet.

The courts are not saying the trump admin cant deport people, they are saying the trump admin cant deport people without due process.

 

[ElChupacabra]

It's because he wants the power to deport people without due process.

The other side of this is what he mentioned during his press conference with Bukele, where he mentioned sending "home grown" criminals to CECOT as well. The due process here in terms of appeals etc. come into question as well, since it's very likely the chances for convicted criminals to appeal their cases is greatly diminished if they're outside the US.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

They may not have known he was given a free pass by a judge to be here.

When someone gets stopped by the authorities and shows their I.D., all pertinent info on that person is retrieved instantly.
But let's assume for a moment that the system was down for whatever reason. If Garcia had been afforded his Constitutional right of due process, his protection from deportation would have stopped the mistake from happening.
Both the lower courts and the Supreme Court recognized his protected status, and ordered the government to facilitate his return.
The government flatly refused to return Garcia.
When the government refuses a Supreme Court order...... that is a Constitutional crises.

Donald needs to abide by his oath to uphold the Constitution..... period.
Or face the consequences.
Impeachment and criminal action.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

90% of lawyers are Democrats, 100% of judges use to be lawyers, you do the math.

YOU do your homework.

1. We have a conservative-majority Supreme court

2. Of the 679 district court judges, 257 (about 38%) were appointed by Republican presidents, while 384 (about 57%) were appointed by Democratic presidents as of January 2, 2025

3. Court of appeals: of the 179 judges, 89 (about 50%) were appointed by Republican presidents as of January 2, 2025

Judicial appointment history for United States federal courts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Using the Alien Enemy's Act to deport illegal immigrants is so bogus! Below is text from the act. Are we being invaded by a foreign country?

Unless Congress declares war, the President can invoke the Alien Enemy Act only upon his determination and proclamation that a foreign nation or government is conducting or threatening an "invasion or predatory incursion" into the territory of the United States.

They can't read. Trump can't read. Trump supporters can't read. And the ones that can actually read apparently suffer from racism-induced dyslexia, or they are just too lazy and don't want to read anything. The country is being operated by belligerent ignorant assholes and their political base of support are belligerent, illiterate, ignorant assholes.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

The judicary has an obligation to balance the needs of all parties involved. If they are going to refuse to do that things can get much uglier for them.

I agree with you on this point.

I think there is a real risk of violence from ignorant, racist, fascist, anti-Constitutional Trump supporters against judges.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

The executive branch's responsibilities in this matter are:

• Refer people to immigration courts who it suspects are deportable, to get the go-ahead from a judge.
• Deport people who the immigration courts have cleared for deportation.

If the executive branch is trying to do something other than those two things (i.e. breaking the law by doing an end-run around the Constitution), then yeah, of course the courts are going to interfere with that. And rightly so.

100%

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Neither are the courts. They can not interfere with the executive branch executing their responsibilities for an indefinite length of time. Which seems to be what they are demanding.

The purpose of the emergency orders, temporary restraining orders, and injunctions is to prevent permanent harm while a case is proceeding. We can't undo the damage caused to a person's due process rights after the government deports that person to a foreign gulag. It's hard for you to understand this because you don't value due process rights.

This is especially true given the administration's outrageously belligerent attitude towards the recent Supreme Court order concerning the facilitation of Garcia's return.

The Trump administration proves every single day why they cannot be trusted.

 

[Metric Mouse]

Umm... Trump... you dummy... we absolutely have to have due process.

 

[jpevans]

........to face deportation hearings. It amusing that the right has come down to making this about a word.

"Constitution.... This one,

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Nor have the courts offered any time limits to restrain how long a person can delay a deportation from happening. I am suggesting that perhaps both sides can reach a compromise.

The reason why for the delay is that the Trump administration is not respecting their due process rights. The compromise is for the Trump administration to stop violating the U.S. Constitution.

This isn't that complicated.

Trump is not a king. He doesn't get to do whatever he wants. He has to follow the law. If he refuses to the follow the law then Congress must impeach and remove him from office.

Follow the law.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

It is the issue because the only thing the gov needs to prove is the person os not a citizen. Why not say that anyone who feels they were picked up in error have 1 week to produce proof that they are a citizen of this country. If they can't, they are removed.

We already have a process for this that respects due process rights and is reasonably efficient. The problem isn't the courts. The problem is Trump is demanding the right to deport people without due process.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

They may not have known he was given a free pass by a judge to be here.

All it was was an order to not deport Garcia to El Salvador.

But you hate these people so much you can't phrase it any other way.

There is no law or court order that can overcome your hatred for these people.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Democrats are demanding it.

No, this is bullshit. We already have a process to do this. It is a reasonable process. They get notice, they get to hire lawyer if they want, they appear before an immigration judge. All of the steps in this process can be done relatively quickly. The problem is there is not enough funding for the immigration courts. The obstacle to increase funding for immigration courts is the belligerent attitude of Republicans. They don't want more funding for immigration courts.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

I'm suggesting the courts set a reasonable limit on themselves to adjudication deportees rights. Why should the executive branch be burdened by the judicaries inadequacy? It seems to me the judical branch 9s trying to make their problem the executive branch's problem.

It is the President's obligation to faithfully execute the law. That's why. And if the moron doesn't want to faithfully execute, which includes due process, as outlined in the Constitution. he can ****ing resign.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

who is demanding "unlimited amount of time"? name some.

No one is.

It's a lie.

They cannot help themselves but constantly lie because they hate the Constitution and they want Trump to be a dictator.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

"Constitution.... This one,

100%