re: Megyn Kelly — Alien Enemies Act is not subject to judicial review.

again, the Act sets out the conditions for it to come into effect.

quote:

---

That whenever there shall be a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion shall be perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States, by any foreign nation or government, and the President of the United States shall make public proclamation of the event

---

Construction wise it break down as when we there is a:

1. Declared War between the US and a Foreign Nation or Government. obviously not what’s going on here

then they use the word OR, so second situation:

2A: An invasion or predatory incursion by a foreign nation or governmenr
AND- use of and creates a conditional clause.
a proclamation of that event by the president.

So the president’s proclamation is necissary for the act to come into effect but not itself sufficient.

There is also no language in the act giving the president unreviewable power to make this proclamation.

The statute gives him unreviewable authority to determine what to do with the enemy aliens while the statue is in effect.

it doesn’t say he has full unreviewable power to declare the statute in effect.

again the court has said it can always review interpretation of a statute and constitutionality.

SFP:

You are changing the topic.

The issue I was addressing was your idea that Trump is allowed to deport any Venezuelan. That is false, given the language of his Proclomation.

Whether his invocation of the Act is valid is a separate question.

quote:

---

The issue I was addressing was your idea that Trump is allowed to deport any Venezuelan. That is false, given the language of his Proclomation.

---

no the subject is what is reviewable.

and again, for his EO to be valid, his interpretation of the act must be valid, and his interpretation of the act conflicts with the language and would lead to absurd results.

That was a quick walk down into your mom’s basement (your office)

quote:

---

Being against DEMs is "moderate" now?

---

quote:

---

The case she cites isn't even really relevant to the discussion at hand. And she knows this, but she's making that money.

---

Here we go…

Also, your take sounds a bit conspiracy theorist.

quote:

---

Do you have to change your voice when you answer the phone at your office so that the caller thinks you have a secretary?

---

Why are you assuming my secretary's gender?

By maybe, I mean there isn’t a clear standard that the group in question must be some flag bearing uniformed invading military force. For example, a contracted or otherwise funded controlled or politically aligned paramilitary or terrorist organization. You are interpreting it that way, but combatants in the modern age seldom fight under flag and banner. They are insurgents, guerillas, and terrorists with disjointed affiliations to a regime. If Afghani Taliban sympathizers for example were coming in through the Southern border and terrorizing Americans, could the AEA not be leveraged? Were covert US paramilitary mercenaries fighting in the Banana Wars in Central America at the turn of the century any less American than the uniformed troops fighting in Europe? I bet the Guatemalans don’t think they were.

The text clearly says ANY invasion or predatory incursion shall be perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States, by any foreign nation or government. Those standards are met with TdAs affiliation to the Maduro regime as its Narco-terrorism arm.