re: Stephen Miller rejects DC judges legal authority over national security.

quote:

---

When you feed Grok a factual scenario presuming legal and proper use of a particular statute, which ignore that this discussion if specifically over whether or not the use of the statute was legal and proper.

---

SFP:

quote:

---

And the decision made by the Trump admin to interpret it in this way and act in this novel way was unilateral.

---

Weren’t three of the three criteria met?

quote:

---

You're just arguing that Congress gave the President the opportunity to at unilaterally.

---

Was it passed bipartisan?

quote:

---

A judge cannot direct the commander in chief to do anything when the CIC is acting in a capacity to defend the country.

---

Your comment assumes the CIC is acting legally and within his Constitutional and statutory limits. The role of the judge to to ensure compliance in both areas.

IF the CIC is within his statutory and Constitutional limits, a court cannot direct him acting as CIC.

IF the CIC is not within his statutory or Constitutional limits of that role, a court can rule so and the CIC can no longer (legally) act.

quote:

---

This isn't unilateral. It's based in a law passed by Congress that authorizing the President to remove illegals that are deemed to be a national security risk. Since it's a matter of national security, the Executive branch is within its constitutional rights to make these determinations.

---

And this law has already been upheld by SCOTUS during the Truman administration. Eisenhower also used this law.

Meanwhile, the legacy press is ignoring the legality of the law.

This judge is way outside of his lane and is acting as a vigilante for the left who can't legitimately stop Trump.

quote:

---

The Alien Enemies Act can only be applied during wartime....we arent in war....


It is really simple...black and white. So in this case Miller is wrong

---

This is the major aggressive interpretation of the admin.

Because I spend as little time as possible consuming mainstream news, I find myself viscerally disgusted when I watch one of these bitches ask disingenuous bad faith questions all while wearing the smuggest of looks.

Vermin

quote:

---

This is the major aggressive interpretation of the admin.

---

Can you mf'ers not read and interpret what was posted. There is that big word "Or" in the leading statement of the law. It doesn't just preclude war being being declared

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 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, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being males of the age of fourteen years and upwards, who shall be within the United States, and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured and removed, as alien enemies."

quote:

---

The Alien Enemies Act can only be applied during wartime....we arent in war....

---

This is a media talking point. Truman used this law between WWII and the Korean War.

SCOTUS upheld it as being a Constitutional law.
The 1948 Ludecke decision to be exact.

LINK

THE LEGACY MEDIA can't stop lying.

quote:

---

quote:
This is the major aggressive interpretation of the admin.

Can you mf'ers not read and interpret what was posted. There is that big word "Or" in the leading statement of the law. It doesn't just preclude war being being declared

---

Thank you sir! Even a corksrew lawyer can't muddy this up, but he's trying! LoL