- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:17 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
because deep-down, he knows the country has turned on his idols.
I don't need any "deep down" analysis to see MAGA turn on people promoting smaller government, like Massie
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:18 am to SlowFlowPro
Occasionally coupon attorney’s TDS does bubble to the surface.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:19 am to riccoar
quote:
Care to elaborate?
That's a longer sentence than saying she's wrong, so tell us how you believe so.
he will avoid this like the plague.
Just one guys opinion, but this is why that douche canoe should go away. "I am smarter than everyone....but I will never explain my random point."
what a miserable prick.
This post was edited on 3/21/25 at 9:21 am
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:20 am to loogaroo
It's not subject to judicial review bc the SCOTUS said so not
quote:
Megyn Kelly
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:21 am to Screaming Viking
quote:
he will avoid this like the plague.
No. I'm driving to my office right now, and I will give a detailed explanation, again.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:21 am to Gifman
there's no way this moron practices law. every attorney I know is busier than a one-legged man in an arse kicking contest. this loser is posting on TD all day, every day for 20 years. if you listen closely, you can hear him munching on funions.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:22 am to texag7
quote:
One is a strip center divorce lawyer and the other smuggles illegals into Texas
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I don't need any "deep down" analysis to see MAGA turn on people promoting smaller government,
SFP would reducing the government work force, disbanding agencies like the DOE, USAID, etc. not be making government smaller? Judges come in and do everything they can to stop it and you are not concerned at all.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:23 am to Gifman
quote:
Coupon divorce lawyers are big mad about this
I think I might know who you be talkin bout!
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:26 am to loogaroo
I think what the judges, up and down the line, and their partners filing these suits will claim is not the actions under the Alien Enemies Act, but the invocation of the act itself.
Both paths are losers, for the left, because of the word 'incursion'.
Both paths are losers, for the left, because of the word 'incursion'.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:26 am to Warboo
Its such a lazy way to debate.
Demand smaller government, but complain when you get it because its "not good enough". As if we are foolish enough to believe that he would EVER think it was enough. And if someone like Massie were president today, slashing Government, he'd be complaining about that too. The goal posts must constantly move to maintain his "conservative" beard.
Demand smaller government, but complain when you get it because its "not good enough". As if we are foolish enough to believe that he would EVER think it was enough. And if someone like Massie were president today, slashing Government, he'd be complaining about that too. The goal posts must constantly move to maintain his "conservative" beard.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:31 am to HeadCall
quote:
she’s sexy
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:32 am to HeadCall
quote:
Just because she’s sexy doesn’t mean I’ll listen to a woman explain anything to me. Get it together guys
Well she is a lawyer and I would surely believe her over SFP or Hank!
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:32 am to HeadCall
quote:
Just because she’s sexy doesn’t mean I’ll listen to a woman explain anything to me. Get it together guys
Well she is a lawyer and I would surely believe her over SFP or Hank!
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:39 am to riccoar
quote:
Care to elaborate?
That's a longer sentence than saying she's wrong, so tell us how you believe so.
The Act is broken down into 2 different conditions necessary in order for the President to invoke the expansive powers beyond judicial review.
quote:
Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government
or
quote:
any invasion or predatory incursion shall be perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States, by any foreign nation or government,
Ludecke v. Watkins
Is the case they keep citing. This case is a WW2 case involving the first path (declared war). Now, not only was there judicial review about this issue, but also there wasn't much debate that WW2 was a "Declared war" (the bigger discussion in the case was determining when the war ended, which the court gave lots of deference to the admin).
In fact, in my (not expansive) research, this act has only been invoked in 3 fully-declared wars, using that first condition. As far as I can tell, no President has ever invoked the 2nd condition and this act has never been used outside of an official, Congressionally-declared war. scenario.
I don't see any legitimate argument that it's beyond judicial review to ensure that the conditions required of the statute exist, and the case they keep citing did this exact analysis. What they are referencing is the use of executive power AFTER this determination has been made, but that isn't necessarily the current debate/discussion.
And, we also have no caselaw on this issue to guide us, as, to my knowledge, the path we're on now has never been traversed, by executive or judge. This is new, novel territory all around.
*Edited to fix bad quoting
This post was edited on 3/22/25 at 10:14 am
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:41 am to Warboo
quote:
SFP would reducing the government work force, disbanding agencies like the DOE, USAID, etc. not be making government smaller?
They still exist and are fully-funded.
We're just putting that money in treasury accounts.
And invoking laws that are the subject of this thread are the exact opposite of a "limited government" approach, especially the attack on fundamental rights (due process) of all persons located in the US (regardless of citizenship or immigration status).
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:41 am to SlowFlowPro
Miller covered all that. He said they met all three criteria.
He also said that they only had to meet one.
He also said that they only had to meet one.
This post was edited on 3/21/25 at 9:43 am
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:45 am to SlowFlowPro
While you seem to be generally hated across the PT, I don't mind your input. But you seem to do this often:
Make a carte blanche statement like:
Then:
It'd be better to just begin with the latter.
Make a carte blanche statement like:
quote:
The case she cites isn't even really relevant to the discussion at hand.
Then:
quote:
And, we also have no caselaw on this issue to guide us, as, to my knowledge, the path we're on now has never been traversed, by executive or judge. This is new, novel territory all around
It'd be better to just begin with the latter.
This post was edited on 3/21/25 at 9:45 am
Posted on 3/21/25 at 9:46 am to Gifman
quote:
Coupon divorce lawyers are big mad about this
Page 2 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News