Reply to Kilmar coming back

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Kilmar coming back"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]There are 50 Venezuelans who were in the United States legally and have never been accused, much less convicted of any crime, locked up in CECOT.

BRING THEM BACK![/quote]

THEY ARENT AMERICANS! We don’t want them.[/quote]

THEY ARE HUMAN!!!!! I’m American AND I WANT THEM HERE.
 I would much rather see you deported. [/quote]

They have homes. 
In their own countries 
[b]Anyone here illegally needs to be deported.[/b] [/quote]

after due process, per the US Constitution.[/quote]

[b]Due process is different for illegals than for citizens.  [/b]And we have such a thing as expedited removal.

Out they go![/quote]
No it is not.[/quote]

Yeah expedited removal, where they don't go infront of judge doesn't exist

or does it?[/quote]
Illegal immigrants who have appeared in front a judge and given an order of expedited removal can be deported. Random people on the street who don’t have such an order cannot be sent to a foreign gulag for no reason.[/quote]

No, for expedited removal,[b] they don't go infront of a judge.[/b]  It's a faster process than a deportation hearing.

Here's an immigration advocacy group describing the process. Typically in the past it was used at the border, now they're changing how its used.

https://www.nilc.org/resources/know-your-rights-expedited-removal-expansion/

Do illegals at the border have due process if you're defining it as going in front of a judge? It would appear that no, not everyone has due process if you're going by that definition.[/quote]

Individuals placed in expedited removal generally[b] have no right to challenge their deportation in federal court, [/b]thanks to jurisdiction-stripping provisions in the 1996 law which created the process. This means that even where an immigration officer acted unlawfully in issuing an order of expedited removal, a noncitizen is severely restricted in their ability to challenge that decision. Individuals may only bring a lawsuit challenging their expedited removal order if they are a lawful permanent resident, or someone already determined to be a refugee or granted asylum, who has been wrongfully subject to expedited removal. [b]In 2020, the Supreme Court upheld this law, finding that it did not violate the right to habeas corpus or due process. [/b]

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics