- 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
re: Trump administration contends it has no duty to return illegally deported man to US
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:49 pm to the808bass
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:49 pm to the808bass
quote:
You’re pretty blinded on this case and have taken special care to believe every single detail the media feeds you about the story.
Cool. I've actually gotten my facts from the legal filings in this case. It was just easier to paste that summation from Time. It tracked the legal pleadings.
I think this topic has just about played out. We understand each other.
0
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:49 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
Jake why do you like illegals so much?
I don't.
I think they should be largely deported, but subject to the Constitutional requirements of Due Process.
Eroding their rights erodes everyone's rights
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:49 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm married
Oh I’m sure of that. There’s a lid for most every pot.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:51 pm to SlowFlowPro
Define due process for an illegal.
In my eyes it would be someone not here legally being caught and sent back. A court doesn’t need to have any say since the individual broke a law entering our country.
In my eyes it would be someone not here legally being caught and sent back. A court doesn’t need to have any say since the individual broke a law entering our country.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:52 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
In my eyes it would be someone not here legally being caught and sent back. A court doesn’t need to have any say since the individual broke a law entering our country.
Get ready for a “smart” response.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:52 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
. A court doesn’t need to have any say
Well then no due process was given, really.
quote:
since the individual broke a law entering our country.
As has been explained to you, illegals have rights, including due process rights.
Do you want me to quote the USSC ruling from last week confirming this 9-0? That includes Scalia and Thomas.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:52 pm to DemonKA3268
I’m bored right now so I’ll let him peck away
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:53 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm married (and just had an exchange with my wife)
Pitcher or catcher?
What’s he like?
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:53 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
I’m bored right now so I’ll let him peck away
Same. I love it when “smart” people talk
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:54 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Well then no due process was given, really.
You didn’t define due process. Where does it start and end for a non citizen? Again, intervention and removal is still due process
This post was edited on 4/14/25 at 8:55 pm
Posted on 4/14/25 at 8:59 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
Where does it start and end for a non citizen?
Due process starts for illegals the same as it does for everyone, when the state forcefully interrupts your life and interjects itself (the technical term in the US is "depriving you of life, liberty, or property"). This can be done in various forms.
quote:
You didn’t define due process.
I was hoping I didn't need. to
To be technical, this is procedural due process, which is the historical concept behind the term (substantive due process is where things get squishy). It's just a requirement that the state follow certain protocols in the process prior to its final resolution/action taken against the individual. The amount can change, but the bare minimum is notice of state action, an opportunity to respond, and an impartial arbiter applying the facts to the law in question.
When you say
quote:
A court doesn’t need to have any say
You're removing 2, possibly all 3 of the bare minimum requirements of PDP.
This post was edited on 4/14/25 at 9:00 pm
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
Nobody cares. He was here illegally. Now he’s not.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I was hoping I didn't need. to
What the frick? You said you were smart??
Anyway, you and whatever his name is have a good night. Make sure to clean yourself real good before penetration.
Back to actual reality.
ETA: A truly smart person wouldn’t respond…
This post was edited on 4/14/25 at 9:04 pm
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:I know you think it is but I am not so sure.
The problem is that the legal argument is very strong
My understanding of the facts are that he was given a hearing and a deportation order was issued and that a stay was also issued prevention the execution of the deportation because of a fear of other gangs. I am going to go out on a limb and assert that the stay is and has always been subject to review and recall allowing the deportation to be executed. It appears that the recall hearing did not take place. Had it taken place then I am going to go out n limb again and say the stay would have been vacated allowing the deportation to take place. (based on what El Salvador has done regarding its gang problem)
When a appellant has a valid issue and wins that issued but does not change the outcome of the case it is known as a harmless error. And that is what we have here harmless error.
This post was edited on 4/14/25 at 9:08 pm
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:07 pm to JimEverett
quote:
Two things:
As usual, I'm pretty close to agreement with your analysis.
I think removal of Mahmoud Khalil's (Columbia student) American-citizen wife would be a selling point in the next Presidential election...especially on this Board.
This post was edited on 4/14/25 at 9:34 pm
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Due process starts for illegals the same as it does for everyone, when the state forcefully interrupts your life and interjects itself
So the State shouldn’t have a problem with illegals even though there is US Criminal Code pertaining to that?
quote:
This can be done in various forms.
Like identifying said illegal, verifying with illegals home country, and sending them back? Due process?
quote:
but the bare minimum is
quote:
notice of state action
The government or govt official, POTUS, saying illegals need to leave. This has been done.
quote:
an opportunity to respond
They have been notified and have had a chance to self deport. This has been done.
quote:
impartial arbiter applying the facts to the law in question.
A government agency verifies and processes, all which is supervised and controlled under DHS/Sec of State. This has been done also in coordination with illegals country of origin.
quote:
You're removing 2, possibly all 3 of the bare minimum requirements of PDP.
All 3 are applied above.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
I am not surprised you refuse to see the point.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
By the way, let’s say we have 10 people. All 10 can interpret things differently.
It’s not being smart, everything is open to interpretation.
Majority of “smart” people know this.
It’s not being smart, everything is open to interpretation.
Majority of “smart” people know this.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:11 pm to IvoryBillMatt
I would not agree that his wife should be removed. That should be a baseline of sane agreement.
But it’s an online forum. That makes it hard to separate the “IWHI”-esque posts or “I hope he rots in hell”-esque overreach and hyperbolic posts from people who actually wished for the deportation/removal of an American citizen.
But there will be more people who genuinely support that now than did 10 years ago. I think that some people might call that “blowback” in other sociocultural arguments.
But it’s an online forum. That makes it hard to separate the “IWHI”-esque posts or “I hope he rots in hell”-esque overreach and hyperbolic posts from people who actually wished for the deportation/removal of an American citizen.
But there will be more people who genuinely support that now than did 10 years ago. I think that some people might call that “blowback” in other sociocultural arguments.
Posted on 4/14/25 at 9:16 pm to the808bass
quote:
But there will be more people who genuinely support that now than did 10 years ago. I think that some people might call that “blowback” in other sociocultural arguments.
Good point...and if I didn't have more confidence in the ascendancy of the cultural Right in America, I might be more sympathetic to that.
Page 11 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News