- 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: Guess which way Barrett voted today on Trump using the AEA
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:34 pm to boosiebadazz
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:34 pm to boosiebadazz
This board is completely gone and in full tribalist mode. I probably need to take a break.
2
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:35 pm to Bunk Moreland
When the first order principle is whatever Daddy says it is, you’re gonna have periods like this.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:40 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
This board is completely gone and in full tribalist mode. I probably need to take a break.
I'm with you. 90% of the Board thinks a judge or justice should rule on a policy based on whether or not it's a good policy.
This post was edited on 4/7/25 at 11:27 pm
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:40 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
The law shouldn't be interpreted "for or against" any particular president. You might not like the result, but it's certainly a rational interpretation of the Wartime Aliens Act to say that it applies only to when war has been declared.
If you're expecting an act of Congress to stop an invading force well.. I got bad news for you
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:44 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
The detainees also sought equitable relief against summary removal. Although judicial review under the AEA is limited, we have held that an individual subject to detention and removal under that statute is entitled to “‘judicial review’” as to “questions of interpretation and constitutionality” of the Act as well as whether he or she “is in fact an alien enemy fourteen years of age or older.” Ludecke, 335 U. S., at 163-164, 172, n. 17. (Under the Proclamation, the term “alien enemy” is defined to include “all Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older who are members of TdA, are within the United States, and are not actually naturalized or lawful permanent residents of the United States.” 90 Fed. Reg. 13034.) The detainees’ rights against summary removal, however, are not currently in dispute. The Government expressly agrees that “TdA members subject to removal under the Alien Enemies Act get judicial review.” Reply in Support of Application To Vacate 1. “It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law” in the context of removal proceedings. Reno v. Flores, 507 U. S. 292, 306 (1993). So, the detainees are entitled to notice and opportunity to be heard “appropriate to the nature of the case.”
Interesting
This post was edited on 4/7/25 at 7:45 pm
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:48 pm to Arkaea79
quote:
If you're expecting an act of Congress to stop an invading force well.. I got bad news for you
How is this STOPPING an invading force? The question is, what level of due process is afforded certain aliens who are ALREADY here?
I am thrilled the Supreme Court held that the Act can be applied to gangs. As a practical matter, it might help stop future illegal immigration, because it will discourage people from testing our judicial system.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:49 pm to Riverside
quote:
Can’t these same criticisms be levied at Roberts?
If you pick the right judge, their sex is irrelevant. Republicans have gotten better at picking judges but we’re nowhere close to the Democrats.
Yes, they're both swamp rats.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:50 pm to stout
ACB has the beady dead eyes of a far left liberal . I knew she was one from the start when I read she adopted kids from Haiti
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:51 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
You might not like the result, but it's certainly a rational interpretation of the Wartime Aliens Act to say that it applies only to when war has been declared.
This would be true if the act didn't explicitly give options for using the act besides a declared war. You would have to pretend parts of the act don't exist to come to this conclusion.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:52 pm to Zgeo
Virtue signaling to further her career.
That's all it was.
...and it worked.
That's all it was.
...and it worked.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:52 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Southern white women who are obsessed with adopting Africans creep me out. I know quite a few around here and they're all similar. They attend a megachurch, are involved in some MLM scheme, post their entire lives on social media and ooze disingenuousness. The cynic in me thinks these women (who almost uniformly adopt boys) are grooming these kids to satisfy some repressed desire.
God love Chicken for this Board. I thank God for the Freedom of Speech we have in this country.
Some of y'all are some serious racists without the ability to recognize Christian charity. Thanks for sharing.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:56 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
This would be true if the act didn't explicitly give options for using the act besides a declared war. You would have to pretend parts of the act don't exist to come to this conclusion.
Then it shifts to courts ruling if those options apply, too, which the Supreme Court seemed to rule was their role today (in spite of online rhetoric otherwise)
This isn't shocking as I believe there is no case law on that part of the statute as this is the first attempted application of it.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:56 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
God love Chicken for this Board. I thank God for the Freedom of Speech we have in this country.
Some of y'all are some serious racists without the ability to recognize Christian charity. Thanks for sharing.
People started going from hypocrites to borderline insane around 2019
Posted on 4/7/25 at 7:58 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
This would be true if the act didn't explicitly give options for using the act besides a declared war. You would have to pretend parts of the act don't exist to come to this conclusion.
Just got in. I respect your opinion 10 Wheels, so I'll read the Act again.
My main point is that a Justice should have fealty to the Constitution and the law not a political party or a president. From what I've read Barrett's opinion, seemed reasonable...even if wrong. That doesn't make Barrett a traitor.
This post was edited on 4/8/25 at 6:13 am
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
People started going from hypocrites to borderline insane around 2019
Prior to that
You joined in '04
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:09 pm to laxtonto
quote:
I don’t necessarily agree with her on 2, but I can agree to a point on 3. It reads like the real
Issue here is how advisoriol the executive and judicial were in this case and it should have had more time to process through the system vs. how it was handled
That's the thing, we don't have time for this to playthrough the system. This is a Presidents action, so scotus needs to pick up quickly as they are equals. Not some low level district court.
Essentially an executive decision needed to be made.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:09 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
Prior to that
You joined in '04
I was voted the best poster of this board over multiple years prior to the MAGA era
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:10 pm to HagaDaga
quote:
so scotus needs to pick up quickly as they are equals. Not some low level district court.
Not how it works. The Supreme Court isn't even a trial court.
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:11 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
I doubt that the gangs are acting at the direction of any foreign government, but that's not my call.
After reading the Act more closely, it looks like the president makes that call without any judicial review based on this portion:
"...any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event."
After reading the Act more closely, it looks like the president makes that call without any judicial review based on this portion:
"...any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event."
Posted on 4/7/25 at 8:11 pm to stout
Stupid unfrickable bitch. Trump needs to deport these mother frickers to her front lawn.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News