re: Breaking: Supreme Court Blocks Trump’s Use of Alien Enemies Act to Deport Illegals

quote:

---

who bl continues to bring up a bunch of irrelevant nonsense.

---

Says the make who discussed Lake Riley

We were discussing the ruling on the merits, not your pivot to injunctions.

quote:

---

Better questions (and relevent to the OP) was the vaccine mandate given injunctive relief before the final ruling? I bet they would have been pizzed if it did! Damn activist judges!

---

Guess I was wrong.

quote:

---

Nope. They were given ample opportunity to act, in the appropriate time frame.

---

quote:

---

Naw dog.

---

Oh no! Did I call it by the wrong name? How terrible!

Did they stop the admin from using the alien enemies act to deport criminals or not? If the answer is yes, it's the same thing.

frick yourself.

quote:

---

Oh OK. Glad to hear you're not advocating for judicial review of every deportation of every illegal alien. Welcome aboard.

---

This is BamaATL technique. Congrats.

quote:

---

frick yourself.

---

K.

He's been a melty bitch the past year or 2. Incredibly sad to see.

I mean the other guys in this thread are just idiots who don't have an initial comprehension of what they're discussing, but he sometimes can stop being emotional and make intelligent, rational comments.

TDS (the other kind) is a sad thing to witness and watch people devolve in front of your eyes.

quote:

---

so you are arguing executive discretion only allows the executive to ignore the laws of congress, but not a court.

---

quote:

---

I'm not. The law of our country (and the law building our legal system) is.

I'm just informing you what the law is

---

so

A law passed by Congress and directed to the Executive, subject to review by a co-equal branch of govt (Judiciary), can be ignored by the Executive and either be excused by "lax policies" or use the term executive discretion and the judiciary can not interfere and order the executive to take action because that would be infringing on Article II powers.

But I'm not arguing that, which is what you with your so-called expertise want to keep going to.

What your argument really is, and in typical fashion want to avoid focusing on is:

A ruling from the Judiciary, subject to review by no other branch of government, necessarily inserting itself into Article II powers, that has to be enforced by the Executive (DOJ), can not be ignored by using the excuse of "lax policies" or executive discretion (by not enforcing the encroaching ruling).

Sounds like you are promoting judicial tyranny to me.

ETA: oh, and really sloppy use of distraction trying to introduce asylum law into the discussion. This is not an asylum case for the Maryland Model Dad or AEA. In the case of the Maryland dad the previous poster is correct... he sought asylum AT HIS DEPORTATION HEARING and was denied. The judge just inserted that he can't be deported to, and only to, his country of origin (which is against the wishes of Congress expressed in laws) creating the situation where if he is deported, no matter where, it would be an "illegal" deportation. If he was deported to El Salvador, it was against this judges ruling; if it was to anywhere else but country of origin, it was against Congress' wishes.

quote:

---

A law passed by Congress and directed to the Executive, subject to review by a co-equal branch of govt (Judiciary), can be ignored by the Executive and either be excused by "lax policies" or use the term executive discretion and the judiciary can not interfere and order the executive to take action because that would be infringing on Article II powers.

---

Correct

quote:

---

A ruling from the Judiciary, subject to review by no other branch of government, necessarily inserting itself into ***** Article II powers,

---

*You need to include illegal or improper here, to describe the exercising of Article 2 powers to which courts are "inserting itself"

quote:

---

Sounds like you are promoting judicial tyranny to me.

---

No that's literally the role of courts in our system, as an equal branch checking the Executive to ensure it's not acting illegally or improperly within its Constitutional and Congressional limits on Executive behavior.

quote:

---

Everyone knows what’s happening. “Just follow the law, which we will reinterpret to prevent you from making any effective change to immigration and its consequences on society.”

It only goes one way.

---

It only appears it's going one way because you're ignoring the important part, as he did (which I clarified above).

Your irrational assumption that the behavior at issue is legal or proper is not my issue, and you can't just create a reality where that impropriety doesn't exist.

It appears to be sophistry because you see us discussing actual reality as trying to force impropriety into your false concept of reality. When you start to see the world as it actually is, again, you'll realize it's not that complicated or confusing anymore.