Supreme Court Sides With Wrongly Deported Migrant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Terrorists dont always have the same "due process" rights as a run of the mill unlawfully present alien.

So would this fall under the Supreme Courts admonition for the district court to have due regard for the executive branch?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Which another judge said was BS, essentially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Terrorists dont always have the same "due process" rights as a run of the mill unlawfully present alien.

Everyone on US soil has due process rights. Don’t believe me? Read the 9-0 decision on this from the Supreme Court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Which another judge said was BS, essentially.

Honestly it doesn't matter if he was or wasn't MS-13, America should not send people to death camps, period.

Regardless of whether they were or were not in the country illegally, regardless or whether they were part of a gang, you cannot call yourself a patriot, a true American, a believer in our country's ideals if you support snatching a person off the street in America and sending them to a country where we know they will be sent to a death camp with zero due process.

I don't care if he murdered 150 people, he should get his day in court and if tried and duly convicted he should spend the rest of his life confined in conditions that don't constitute cruel and unusual punishment. If you don't agree with that don't you dare call yourself a patriot or loyal American.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Terrorists dont always have the same "due process" rights as a run of the mill unlawfully present alien.

Everyone on US soil has due process rights. Don’t believe me? Read the 9-0 decision on this from the Supreme Court.

Everyone may have due process but not everyone's due process is identical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Terrorists dont always have the same "due process" rights as a run of the mill unlawfully present alien.

Everyone on US soil has due process rights. Don’t believe me? Read the 9-0 decision on this from the Supreme Court.

Everyone may have due process but not everyone's due process is identical.

Where’s that exception in the case law? I don’t think it exists. 5A says “person.” Do I need to define that for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Terrorists dont always have the same "due process" rights as a run of the mill unlawfully present alien.

Everyone on US soil has due process rights. Don’t believe me? Read the 9-0 decision on this from the Supreme Court.

Everyone may have due process but not everyone's due process is identical.

Where’s that exception in the case law? I don’t think it exists. 5A says “person.” Do I need to define that for you?

Does 5A say everyone have identical due process?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Terrorists dont always have the same "due process" rights as a run of the mill unlawfully present alien.

Everyone on US soil has due process rights. Don’t believe me? Read the 9-0 decision on this from the Supreme Court.

Everyone may have due process but not everyone's due process is identical.

Where’s that exception in the case law? I don’t think it exists. 5A says “person.” Do I need to define that for you?

Does 5A say everyone have identical due process?

if you are a "person" you get due process. Each "person". If you believe there are penumbras and emanations from the word "person" that lodge super-scret footnote exceptions, please do illumonate the crowd here. We haven't your MAGA-vision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Terrorists dont always have the same "due process" rights as a run of the mill unlawfully present alien.

Everyone on US soil has due process rights. Don’t believe me? Read the 9-0 decision on this from the Supreme Court.

Everyone may have due process but not everyone's due process is identical.

Where’s that exception in the case law? I don’t think it exists. 5A says “person.” Do I need to define that for you?

Does 5A say everyone have identical due process?

if you are a "person" you get due process. Each "person". If you believe there are penumbras and emanations from the word "person" that lodge super-scret footnote exceptions, please do illumonate the crowd here. We haven't your MAGA-vision.

Where did I dispute that each person gets due process? All I said is each person has a different due process. Does that contradict 5A?

[Anonymous]

What due process do known terrorists get under the Patriot Act, and/or who are deemed a threat to national security? Just asking. This isn't harmless granny. It's an adjudicated member of an international terror org.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Which another judge said was BS, essentially.

Honestly it doesn't matter if he was or wasn't MS-13, America should not send people to death camps, period.

Regardless of whether they were or were not in the country illegally, regardless or whether they were part of a gang, you cannot call yourself a patriot, a true American, a believer in our country's ideals if you support snatching a person off the street in America and sending them to a country where we know they will be sent to a death camp with zero due process.

I don't care if he murdered 150 people, he should get his day in court and if tried and duly convicted he should spend the rest of his life confined in conditions that don't constitute cruel and unusual punishment. If you don't agree with that don't you dare call yourself a patriot or loyal American.

Is this a real post?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Which another judge said was BS, essentially.

Honestly it doesn't matter if he was or wasn't MS-13, America should not send people to death camps, period.

Regardless of whether they were or were not in the country illegally, regardless or whether they were part of a gang, you cannot call yourself a patriot, a true American, a believer in our country's ideals if you support snatching a person off the street in America and sending them to a country where we know they will be sent to a death camp with zero due process.

I don't care if he murdered 150 people, he should get his day in court and if tried and duly convicted he should spend the rest of his life confined in conditions that don't constitute cruel and unusual punishment. If you don't agree with that don't you dare call yourself a patriot or loyal American.

'death camp' is a false statement according to the court record. It is an irrelevant point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those that don't want to read, DOJ loses again with another trip to the woodshed to be spanked.

Will this administration and its supporters ever concede the fact that Trump is NOT a king?

Sad irony is that the DOJ was once considered the world's greatest litigation firm. Today, it would get its a** handed to them by Jacoby and Myers.

SCOTUS determines this not the appeals court.

You are actually funny. So you’ll concede Trump is not king when the Supreme Court upholds the 4th circuit?

I never alleged Trump is king so not sure where you are getting that from. ? The point is that this is heading back to SCOTUS and doesn’t stop at the appeals court, the same one that lost at scotus for the AEA ruling among other times they have been overturned.

SCOTUS isn’t going to mandate that the president engage in specific foreign policy acts and report that to a district judge.

Good thing the judge didn’t require the president to engage in specific foreign policy acts then

She absolutely did with her expansion of the definition of facilitate beyond its typical use in immigration aka dictating specific actions with the president of ES to effectuate his release, and for the court’s intrusive discovery mandates. Read the court docs - they are all online. District judge can’t force any specific engagement with a foreign power as per extensive case law.

Read the 4th Circuit appellate decision. Wilkinson is a conservative Reagan appointee. The government got trashed.

That’s one step on the way to SCOTUS not the final word on this - you realize that right?

For something this basic, about the general powers of the court, the government is going to lose. There is zero chance the SC will say that the government can ignore court orders. The proper remedy is to appeal them. You realize that right?

They did appeal. They won at the Supreme Court, with that court asking the lower court to reissue its order with more clarity and respect for the executive branch. The lower court ignored the Supreme Court's ruling, and they ignored the new order of the court given that it got the higher court's ruling wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is there any chance this guy really has ties to MS-13? If he does we are f'd. I really hope this claim was fully investigated before democrats started doubling down on the situation.

here's documentation https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1396906/dl?inline=

Terrorists dont always have the same "due process" rights as a run of the mill unlawfully present alien.

Everyone on US soil has due process rights. Don’t believe me? Read the 9-0 decision on this from the Supreme Court.

Everyone may have due process but not everyone's due process is identical.

Where’s that exception in the case law? I don’t think it exists. 5A says “person.” Do I need to define that for you?

Does 5A say everyone have identical due process?

if you are a "person" you get due process. Each "person". If you believe there are penumbras and emanations from the word "person" that lodge super-scret footnote exceptions, please do illumonate the crowd here. We haven't your MAGA-vision.

Where did I dispute that each person gets due process? All I said is each person has a different due process. Does that contradict 5A?

A. Show us where this idea comes from. What basis in law is there for taking this position.

B. How does this square with the Equal Protection Clause?

And to answer your question, it does violate the Fifth Amendment. Nowhere does it say that some "persons" merit some due process and others "merit" different due process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those that don't want to read, DOJ loses again with another trip to the woodshed to be spanked.

Will this administration and its supporters ever concede the fact that Trump is NOT a king?

Sad irony is that the DOJ was once considered the world's greatest litigation firm. Today, it would get its a** handed to them by Jacoby and Myers.

SCOTUS determines this not the appeals court.

You are actually funny. So you’ll concede Trump is not king when the Supreme Court upholds the 4th circuit?

I never alleged Trump is king so not sure where you are getting that from. ? The point is that this is heading back to SCOTUS and doesn’t stop at the appeals court, the same one that lost at scotus for the AEA ruling among other times they have been overturned.

SCOTUS isn’t going to mandate that the president engage in specific foreign policy acts and report that to a district judge.

Good thing the judge didn’t require the president to engage in specific foreign policy acts then

She absolutely did with her expansion of the definition of facilitate beyond its typical use in immigration aka dictating specific actions with the president of ES to effectuate his release, and for the court’s intrusive discovery mandates. Read the court docs - they are all online. District judge can’t force any specific engagement with a foreign power as per extensive case law.

Read the 4th Circuit appellate decision. Wilkinson is a conservative Reagan appointee. The government got trashed.

That’s one step on the way to SCOTUS not the final word on this - you realize that right?

For something this basic, about the general powers of the court, the government is going to lose. There is zero chance the SC will say that the government can ignore court orders. The proper remedy is to appeal them. You realize that right?

They did appeal. They won at the Supreme Court, with that court asking the lower court to reissue its order with more clarity and respect for the executive branch. The lower court ignored the Supreme Court's ruling, and they ignored the new order of the court given that it got the higher court's ruling wrong.

If you believe this, I would like to know what drugs you're on because I want some too.