• 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!

Trump says US cannot give every person it wants to deport a trial (5 Viewers)

Lord of Planar said:
Where is it stated that "due process" must be a court hearing?
Click to expand...

Right in the AEA. I've repeatedly posted it here and y'all ignore it.

After any such proclamation has been made, the several courts of the United States, having criminal jurisdiction, and the several justices and judges of the courts of the United States, are authorized and it shall be their duty, upon complaint against any alien enemy resident and at large within such jurisdiction or district, to the danger of the public peace or safety, and contrary to the tenor or intent of such proclamation, or other regulations which the President may have established, to cause such alien to be duly apprehended and conveyed before such court, judge, or justice; and after a full examination and hearing on such complaint, and sufficient cause appearing, to order such alien to be removed out of the territory of the United States
 
ColdHardTruth said:
Bondi is a corrupt pile of shit from Flor-I-Duh. Once Dump's ass is out of office, she will be sitting in a cell for the rest of hers.

The time will come when Dump turns on her just like he does with all his minions. Either way, her career is over.
Click to expand...
I suppose you fantasize about the next president sending her to El Salvador.
 
Lutherf said:
Right. Because people here illegally, including criminals and terrorists, are US citizens as long as they are on US soil. Give them a voter ID card, register them as a Democrat and that's the ONLY thing the law provides for!
Click to expand...

Trump, in his refusal to abide by the rule of law and comply with the Constitution, is far worse than a migrant who enters our country illegally.
 
And now that the due process requirements of the AEA have been posted in 301 @Lord of Planar ignores them, again.
 
Lutherf said:
The AEA requires a court hearing ONLY of there is a Habeas claim. If that claim is waived then no hearing is required.
Click to expand...

THEY ARE NOT GETTING THIS OPPORTUNITY
 
W_Heisenberg said:
I think about half the Trump supporters simply do not care what the Constitution says, what the law mandates, or what the Supreme Court orders.
Click to expand...
I think some of those posting here are just yanking chains. They think they are clever that way.
 
Lord of Planar said:
So what "due process" were they not afforded? In this case, due process means they made a legal determination they are here illegally.

That's all due process needs to be. It need not be a court trial.
Click to expand...

In March all they did was arrest them and put them on a plane. That's it.

In the more recent case they gave them a few hours notice, a document in English they couldn't ****ing read, and then began shipping them back.

So, as a practical ****ing matter, they were NOT GIVEN "REASONABLE" NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.

THAT IS WHY THE SUPREME COURT PUT THE KABASH ON IT.
 
Also also.

Let me remind all the Trump supporters in this thread.

There. is. no. war.

The AEA. does. not. apply.
 
ClaraD said:
To send someone to prison
Click to expand...
I said earlier and maintain that I have no issue with them contesting the govs determination and letting the court vett the govs accusation but the accused person waits for their "due process" in the prison. If a mistake has been made, the gov will correct it.
 
It's ironic, at least in part because Trump did his best to scuttle immigration reform that would have expanded the number of judges to deal with just this issue.
 
trouble13 said:
I said earlier and maintain that I have no issue with them contesting the govs determination and letting the court vett the govs accusation but the accused person waits for their due process "due process" in the prison. If a mistake has been made, the gov will correct it.
Click to expand...

Or they wont, as they've demonstrated just recently.
 
trouble13 said:
I said earlier and maintain that I have no issue with them contesting the govs determination and letting the court vett the govs accusation but the accused person waits for their due process "due process" in the prison. If a mistake has been made, the gov will correct it.
Click to expand...
You gonna tell us about "guests" now? I can't find that Constitutional Amendment.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Where is it stated that "due process" must be a court hearing?
Click to expand...
What exactly are you arguing here? You’re all over the place on this topic.

Since we’re discussing immigration and deportation, there are stated methods, like the immigration court, where a person can be heard. That’s one of the important ingredients to due process. “This right to be heard ensures a fair process and protects individuals from arbitrary government actions.“ Did any of these people get a chance to be heard before being transported out of the country? No.

Illegal and legal as far as those accused by the government has no bearing on things. They’re all entitled to a hearing. The Constitution describes simply “people” in this country, not legal or illegal aliens.

The chance to have a meaningful hearing before someone can be deprived of life, liberty, or property is a bedrock of our legal system. No matter how correct you think you are, taking action against others requires those people the opportunity to be heard. Every single time I had to take replevin action to recover a piece of collateral from an individual, I had to have a court hearing where the defendant was afforded the opportunity to be heard, no matter that I had all of the facts and figures in my favor.

On a local platform, you get the opportunity to speak on your behalf in zoning issues that may affect you, property tax levees, licensing issues, etc. Those aren’t court hearings, but in front of recognized authorities. Taking someone off the street to be deported is a much more serious process and there’s a reason hearings in front of immigration judges are required.
 
Lutherf said:
Right. Because people here illegally, including criminals and terrorists, are US citizens as long as they are on US soil. Give them a voter ID card, register them as a Democrat and that's the ONLY thing the law provides for!
Click to expand...
Nobody said that.

Nobody said they were citizens.

They have the right to a deportation hearing. PERIOD.

The reich-wing doesn't get to interfere in due process.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Facilitating could be simply paying for his trip back, but El Salvador has to release him first.

Words have meaning. Please buy a good dictionary.
Click to expand...


Words do have meaning, and Trump's obligation to get Garcia back from El Salvador is found in the words he uttered when he gave his oath to the U.S. Constitution.

It is the Constitution which obligates Trump to use all measures to bring him back. If he does not, he is not doing his job.

Fourth Circuit recently ruled:

The Supreme Court’s decision does not, however, allow the government to do essentially nothing. It requires the government “to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.” “Facilitate” is an active verb. It requires that steps be taken as the Supreme Court has made perfectly clear. (“[T]he Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps.”). The plain and active meaning of the word cannot be diluted by its constriction, as the government would have it, to a narrow term of art. We are not bound in this context by a definition crafted by an administrative agency and contained in a mere policy directive.

Thus, the government’s argument that all it must do is “remove any domestic barriers to [Abrego Garcia’s] return,” is not well taken in light of the Supreme Court’s command that the government facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador. “Facilitation” does not permit the admittedly erroneous deportation of an individual to the one country’s prisons that the withholding order forbids and, further, to do so in disregard of a court order that the government not so subtly spurns. “Facilitation” does not sanction the abrogation of habeas corpus through the transfer of custody to foreign detention centers in the manner attempted here. Allowing all this would “facilitate” foreign detention more than it would domestic return. It would reduce the rule of law to lawlessness and tarnish the very values for which Americans of diverse views and persuasions have always stood.

--

And the differences do not end there. The Executive is inherently focused upon ends; the Judiciary much more so upon means. Ends are bestowed on the Executive by electoral outcomes. Means are entrusted to all of government, but most especially to the Judiciary by the Constitution itself.

The Executive possesses enormous powers to prosecute and to deport, but with powers come restraints. If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home? And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies? The threat, even if not the actuality, would always be present, and the Executive’s obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” would lose its meaning.

--

The Supreme Court and the Fourth Circuit are telling Trump to do his ****ing job.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
In March all they did was arrest them and put them on a plane. That's it.

In the more recent case they gave them a few hours notice, a document in English they couldn't ****ing read, and then began shipping them back.

So, as a practical ****ing matter, they were NOT GIVEN "REASONABLE" NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.

THAT IS WHY THE SUPREME COURT PUT THE KABASH ON IT.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but do you have anything other than what the lying media has claimed?
 
SkyChief said:
It's not my opinion - the U.S. Attorney General said so, and she has the power and authority to deport aliens without due process.
Click to expand...
The MAGAt AG expressed her wrong opinion.
SkyChief said:
“[Abrego Gargia] is not coming back to our country." - Pam Bondi/U.S. Attorney General
Click to expand...
She may well be forced to eat those words.
SkyChief said:
Your (flawed) arguments are based entirely on ignorance of the law, and ignorance of facts.
Click to expand...
This ^ is all you. 😄
 
MTAtech said:

Trump says US cannot give every person it wants to deport a trial​

(Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday said on Truth Social that his administration cannot give everyone it wants to deport a trial "because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years"

In the post, Trump wrote about removing criminals and those illegally in the United States.
===========
First, there is a difference between deportation -- the removal of a person to their home country, and; renditioning someone to a foreign jail.

Second, I believe administrative deportation judges handle deportations, and have been doing so. If we need more of them, hire them. If an administration wants to send people (aliens or American citizens) to a foreign jail, the accused ARE entitled to a trail in court, as per the constitution and the recent Supreme Court ruling.
Click to expand...
President Trump is correct.

Blame the Biden Junta which created the gargantuan mess when it opened the borders in unprecedented fashion.

They want to force the US to keep those illegals by making their deportation impossible.

Not gonna happen/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • W_Heisenberg
  • Crakhobarbie
  • ... and 1 more.
    • Total: 6 (members: 3, guests: 3)
    Back
    Top Bottom