Federal Judge Freezes Trumpster’s Deportation Flights

Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis

Didn't say it was. But United States law is that the most recent court ruling on a subject is the one that should be followed. You can fantasize that the verdict will be overturned while swinging your tiny dick and masturbating to Trump videos. But the reality is that such decisions are rarely overturned.


  Pure Pinocchio lying horse shit - here is the law spelled out - GREGG JARRETT: The law supports Trump's deportation of violent gang members, despite judge's errant ruling -- Judge Boasberg’s precipitous ruling is wrong as a matter of law -- The Alien Enemies Act (AEA) was passed by Congress and signed into law in 1798. It is well-established, has never been repealed, and has been reviewed by courts numerous times. Four different presidents have invoked it, three of them Democrats in the 20th century. Moreover, the act is not limited to wartime authority as some claim. Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Harry Truman used the act well after both world wars had ended. -- The AEA permits a president to order the arrest and removal without a court hearing of "alien enemies" whenever there is a declared war or any "predatory incursion" perpetrated, attempted or threatened against the United States. A predatory incursion is broadly defined as entry into the U.S. for purposes that are contrary to the nation’s interests or laws. The language gives a president broad latitude in his core duty to protect the safety and security of the citizenry. - In 1948, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Truman’s use of the AEA and ruled that the law itself was constitutional (Ludecke v. Watkins, 33 US 160). Importantly, the high court stated that a president’s decision under the Act "precludes judicial review of the removal order." In other words, a judge cannot second-guess the president. The court explained, "The very nature of the President’s power to order the removal of all enemy aliens rejects the notion that courts may pass judgment upon the exercise of his discretion." -- https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/gregg-jarrett-law-supports-trumps-deportation-violent-gang-members-despite-judges-errant-ruling

MAGA doesnt recognize the American judicial system.    And why should they?   Their leader pardons them for storming the Capital and engaging in terrrorism.

 

Thats the world we live in now.     Congratulations to all those "undecided" voters who didnt think there was any meaningful difference between Kamala Harris and President Hitler.

Originally posted by: PJ Stroh

MAGA doesnt recognize the American judicial system.    And why should they?   Their leader pardons them for storming the Capital and engaging in terrrorism.

 

Thats the world we live in now.     Congratulations to all those "undecided" voters who didnt think there was any meaningful difference between Kamala Harris and President Hitler.


    Is this what CNN told you to say?

Hate to toot my own horn again but I was right and the forum MAGAs were wrong again.  

 

Trump lost at the appellate level this time.  To paraphrase one judge said the act wasn't created to deport migrants and said the argument that migrants were an invasion force was ludicrous. 

 

The Bush Judge said those deported were entitled to due process to answer the government allegations that they were members of a gang at a hearing before they were deported. So much winning!

Edited on Mar 26, 2025 4:46pm

Originally posted by: Inigo Montoya

"The Supreme Court in 1948 upheld the law and banned federal courts from even reviewing presidential actions undertaken pursuant to the law. Unelected inferior judges have no authority to seize the powers of the presidency or to overturn Supreme Court rulings."

 

it's already been litigated so this joker will be impeached.


Really? 

Originally posted by: CharlesII

1  I think you're wrong.  The law says OR not and.  That means there does not have to be a declared war, only that an invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government .  If you claim there must be a declaration of War, then the meaning of OR and everthing that follows it has no meaning..

 

2  If you actually read the link I proved to the declaration you'd see that it declares that the Tren De Aragua terrorist organization is actually embedded into the Maduro Regime.  Here.  Let me help you with that.  

 

"Over the years, Venezuelan national and local authorities have ceded ever-greater control over their territories to transnational criminal organizations, including TdA. The result is a hybrid criminal state that is perpetrating an invasion of and predatory incursion into the United States, and which poses a substantial danger to the United States.."   

 

That seems to meet the requirement of the law. and as chief executive in charge of foreign policy and our intelligence apparatus, it's the role of the executive  to make that determination in support of our national security, not some district court judge.  


How did that "or" hold up in the appellate court?

Originally posted by: Mark

How did that "or" hold up in the appellate court?


The twisted logic that had to be used to equate a bunch of guys with tattoos with an invading nation was laughed out of court.

Angry Charles is trying to tell us that due process doesn't matter if the suspects are IMMERGENT CRINIMALS.

 

How stupid.

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now