- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Appeals court rules Trump can’t use Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport Venezuelans
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:38 am to PaperTiger
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:38 am to PaperTiger
quote:
If 10 million plus people entering your country illegally isn't an invasion I dont know what is
To be fair, the last administration left the door wide open for them.
Sort of like the capital police in 1/6 letting people in and then calling it an insurrection.
1
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:40 am to Mid Iowa Tiger
quote:
To be fair, the last administration left the door wide open for them.
Sort of like the capital police in 1/6 letting people in and then calling it an insurrection.
And... the consequences of that BS insurrection were largely overturned, thank goodness.
So can this.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:40 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The 5th Circuit is by far the most conservative circuit
Some of their more recent rulings suggest otherwise.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The 5th Circuit is by far the most conservative circuit
Yes, it is, but you can still pull a bad panel, which was the case here.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:45 am to udtiger
2 GOP appointees.
Trump only has 6 appointees on the 5th. The Reagan and Bush (both of them) appointees outnumber them bigly, and that's ignoring the Clinton, Obama, Biden, and Carter (yeah there is one of them left).
Trump only has 6 appointees on the 5th. The Reagan and Bush (both of them) appointees outnumber them bigly, and that's ignoring the Clinton, Obama, Biden, and Carter (yeah there is one of them left).
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:48 am to Bunk Moreland
Yes to answer your question about if we are in wartime. We have be invaded by 10’s of million foreign people from 100 different countries, s as ll with interest in taking over our culture, jobs, housing, slowing our economy and change to our voting & voices. Does a bomb need to drop o is killing our country in general good enough ? Wait a bit longer and I’m sure those destructive forces will be obvious too
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:48 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The 5th Circuit is by far the most conservative circuit
If they ruled this way, it's not looking good for the administration
Oh boy you'll upset the judicial branch haters with this
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:51 am to SlowFlowPro
5th use to be better but to say it’s the far more conservative court is more to point out how liberal the rest are in comparison
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:54 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
The 5th Circuit is traditionally very conservative.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 8:55 am to Nosevens
quote:
5th use to be better but to say it’s the far more conservative court is more to point out how liberal the rest are in comparison
Extrapolating your premise, why would this not be reflected on the Supreme Court, in the same way?
I think your framing is poor, but even within that framing, you see the same issues with the ACB, Kav, Roberts triumvirate. I'm not sure if Gorsuch would be down for this, either. Thomas, pre-Trump, likely wouldn't, either. Alito finds war and police power anywhere, so he's definitely a go.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:01 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
This is a winning issue for you Dims, keep fighting to keep TDA terrorists in America. I support you.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:01 am to Bunk Moreland
I love watching Bunk and these other pretenders of conservative values show up in these threads and show exactly what they are.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:02 am to Strannix
quote:
This is a winning issue for you Dims, keep fighting to keep TDA terrorists in America. I support you.
I love how this is the new knee jerk cope for every dumb or illegal policy of Trump
"yeah I'm retarded for supporting it, but muh 80/20"
The living embodiment of this punchline
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:03 am to BCreed1
quote:
I love watching Bunk and these other pretenders of conservative values show up in these threads and show exactly what they are.
People who don't want an uncontrollable authoritarian state with no limits on federal power? You think those people are NOT the more conservative group? Why?
How the hell do you define "conservative"?
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:04 am to BCreed1
My point all along has been, be very careful about supporting these declarations of "war" and who is a "terrorist" because it just may give a shitehead Dem a bit too much power. Prplhaz had the best post in the thread:
quote:
Not surprised. It was a very aggressive and novel use of that law. I thought the Court would strike this one down.
And that's ok. When you get aggressive and try novel ideas in prosecuting cases, sometimes it will work and sometimes it won't. At least you are trying.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:04 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
I believe this is the case that the Trump appointed district judge ruled on a few months ago. If so, it is interesting in how this is all framed.
The Judge, rightfully imo, knows he has no power to decide whether a foreign invasion or predatory incursion has occurred. That is the President's decision. Instead, he ruled against the Administration by stating that what was described in the Presidential Proclamation did not describe a foreign invasion or predatory incursion.
Something about that seems too cute. IF the President says there is an invasion and describes something that he, the president, believes is an invasion, but a district court judge does not believe describes an invasion - whose opinion should control?
The Judge, rightfully imo, knows he has no power to decide whether a foreign invasion or predatory incursion has occurred. That is the President's decision. Instead, he ruled against the Administration by stating that what was described in the Presidential Proclamation did not describe a foreign invasion or predatory incursion.
Something about that seems too cute. IF the President says there is an invasion and describes something that he, the president, believes is an invasion, but a district court judge does not believe describes an invasion - whose opinion should control?
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:06 am to JimEverett
Do you think that call should be subject to any review at all?
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:11 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Do you think that call should be subject to any review at all?
Judicial review? No
Congress has foreign policy power capable of stopping Executive action on foreign policy and matters of war/invasion. the Judicial has no such power and we should keep it that way.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:12 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
quote:
Appeals court rules Trump can’t
Of course they do.
An appeals court somewhere will rule that Trump can't wipe his arse after taking a shite, if they ever get the opportunity.
DJT has completely exposed how broken the system is.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:13 am to JimEverett
quote:
Congress has foreign policy power capable of stopping Executive action on foreign policy and matters of war/invasion. the Judicial has no such power and we should keep it that way.
So how do we decide if the President is acting outside of the very limited authority granted to him by the applicable statute?
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News