- 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: Why Judge Boasberg is Wrong
Posted on 3/18/25 at 3:45 pm to TBoy
Posted on 3/18/25 at 3:45 pm to TBoy
quote:
Trump is using the "gang" as a subterfuge to assume war powers, which means suspension of your and my individual rights.
He has a constitutional duty to defend this country from enemies both FOREIGN and domestic. These foreign terrorists are here thanks to a worthless president Biden and a complicit judiciary who let them in. Trump has every right to expel them from our shores. It’s what the statute was placed there for..
1
Posted on 3/18/25 at 3:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So the President can just declare any behavior by any person (including citizens) to fall under that portion of the law
quote:
Alien enemy status
quote:
Alien enemy
quote:
Alien
Posted on 3/18/25 at 4:13 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
It’s what the statute was placed there for..
No, you are wrong, but also you will not allow any actual discussion of the matter. So keep being you, regardless.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 4:14 pm to TBoy
I’d cheer if he deported you
Posted on 3/18/25 at 4:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
yes they in fact are ILLEGAL ALIEN ENEMIES 
Posted on 3/18/25 at 4:17 pm to TBoy
quote:
TBoy
How do you look at yourself in the mirror? Seriously, not trolling you.
You are clearly a beta, and a soy boy, quite possibly gay. Do you feel good about yourself? Have you ever thought about becoming a woman? Everything about you screams woman, so why not do it.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 4:22 pm to Mandtgr47
It's ok that you don't even understand what the issue actually is. It doesn't matter if you are mentally defective, uneducated or brainwashed. It's ok. It isn't personal to me.
However, I understand exactly what the issue is here.
However, I understand exactly what the issue is here.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 4:46 pm to TBoy
Existing deportation laws as you well know have potential consequences of low level judges from 50 states that have become democrats shills in lawfare. Trump knows that the act he’s undertaken has the best chance in both reducing the judicial activism’s as well as highlighting the facts for the masses that want criminal illegals gone. Questions arise about why does the TBoy’s of the nation want these people to stay? Are they good for the country in your eyes or just against anything Trump ?
Posted on 3/18/25 at 4:59 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
What is the difference between Tren de Aragua and ISIS, or the Houthis, or Al Queda or Hamas or Hezbollah?
The concept that only nations and governments can be enemy invaders is very outdated and irrelevant to the current global reality.
Thus the question I put forth to SFP. I'm not trying to go for a "gotcha" with him on this, I think it's a legitimate point and one SCOTUS will need to consider sooner or later as technology allows more and more people and groups to access the entire world (whether in person, remotely or just the repetition of their rhetoric).
quote:
Trump has declared them as a terrorist group, along with other cartels and gangs. I don't believe this label can be challenged by the court, as it is a subjective declaration within the national security powers.
I don't disagree, I think this is all precedent-setting. It may be that a change is needed to declare that FTOs are to be considered the same as a foreign nation.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 5:03 pm to Bard
So a district court has no jurisdiction on a due process claim arising from 5he Executive's use of the AEA?
That is definitely within Congress' power.
So, if you want a case to be heard, got to go to SCOTUS.
That is definitely within Congress' power.
So, if you want a case to be heard, got to go to SCOTUS.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 5:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 3/18/25 at 5:19 pm to Azkiger
We need to send the Chinaman/or whatever judge to the prison in San Salvador.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 6:14 pm to Bard
quote:
I agree, but this brings us to the point of defining a "foreign nation or government". What is our government's definition of a "foreign nation or government" and how is a transnational organization like TdA different from that definition?
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very slippery slope in designating groups as foreign nations or governments, but this scenario pretty much demands either a fundamental and concrete difference be named or the concession that, at least, there is some grey area which can include an organization like TdA.
I don't know why it's so important for them. Just deport them in the normal process.
The secondary issue (which I would love some edification on from actual experts) is how we are sending them to a foreign jail.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 6:15 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
What is the difference between Tren de Aragua and ISIS, or the Houthis, or Al Queda or Hamas or Hezbollah?
Actually engaging in terrorism.
quote:
The concept that only nations and governments can be enemy invaders is very outdated and irrelevant to the current global reality.
Then we need a new law. I don't want that law, but we need it for this sort of behavior.
quote:
Trump has declared them as a terrorist group, along with other cartels and gangs. I don't believe this label can be challenged by the court, as it is a subjective declaration within the national security powers.
So he can declare you a terrorist and detain you and you get no recourse?
Posted on 3/18/25 at 6:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The secondary issue (which I would love some edification on from actual experts) is how we are sending them to a foreign jail.
I think the actual experts would like to know how.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 6:17 pm to moneyg
quote:
Alien
If the executive cannot be checked or challenged, if you are taken in the middle of the night and put on a plane, what is your recourse, exactly?
You can't argue that they made a mistake and you're a citizen, because that determination, per the argument, is exclusive to the Executive and cannot be reviewed by the judiciary. And if anyone were to try, the Executive could claim "national security" to stonewall any inquiry, investigation, or litigation.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 6:20 pm to Azkiger
quote:
But yesterday I thought it was.
For those that don't click the link, this is the post he's linking
quote:
No. I support the Constitution and its limitations on government action and following the rule of law.
The constitution sorts out the various powers of government.
The part of the quote of my post ITT you dishonestly left off:
quote:
The president is limited to declaring people terrorists pursuant to the laws granting him this power. It's not a constitutional issue at this point, it's a statutory issue. And that subjective evaluation is exactly what the Court's role is and evaluating the president's application of congressional authority given to him.
So, the "Constitution" and the "limitations on government" are covered in that post. The limits on the Executive via statutory authority and the limits on the Executive checked by judicial review of its actions.
Summary:
Posted on 3/18/25 at 6:38 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You can't argue that they made a mistake and you're a citizen, because that determination, per the argument, is exclusive to the Executive
That’s not the argument.
It’s a straw man you created.
Posted on 3/18/25 at 6:40 pm to moneyg
quote:
That’s not the argument.
It’s a straw man you created.
No. I did not claim these determinations were "not subject to judicial review", to directly quote one poster (quoting Stephen Miller)
I'm pointing out how that stance is patently insane.
*ETA: another direct quote
quote:
Based on the law as I read it, and I just heard Stephen Miller read it as they will argue it, it doesn't have to be 100 percent clear. Or even 1 percent clear. The president has broad latitude, almost complete latitude.
This post was edited on 3/18/25 at 6:43 pm
Posted on 3/18/25 at 6:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No. I did not claim these determinations were "not subject to judicial review", to directly quote one poster (quoting Stephen Miller)
Stephen Miller didn’t say the determination of citizenship is not subject to judicial review.
You are trying to stand up that straw man because you can’t argue otherwise.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News