yahoo.com
Why would Sessions throw away a case as important as this one and essentially ensure any immigrant can seek asylum with impunity - which he allegedly opposes - just to send one mother and child back to cokeland? Sorry about the hick-tier news site.
Judge from Hawaii huh?
It's time for SCOTUS to strip lower courts of this power
Enough is enough
>naps all day for years
>suddenly held in contempt
I'm not even mad
District of Columbia.
What power, specifically? The plaintiff was deported - through subterfuge and after assurances they would not be deported given to the judge himself - in the midst of their trial, which is a right they're granted by our laws even if they are not a citizen. I don't see what was done here by the judge that is mistaken.
Honestly, what would come of it if they just started ignoring these faggot judges? A lot of Oy Veying but the police arent going to arrest anyone for not listening to a judges activist demands.
If any federal judge's order can be ignored, guess how quickly that gets abused by anyone and everyone? You act like only the Republicans would, or could.
Lets hope it goes that way, accelerate this shit off the cliff.
Oh no some faggot judge is mad that an illegal got deported boy I sure am glad we have judges that care about the rule of law.
They don't have a right to a trial. They have no rights except those granted under treaty with their home country.
Once it is determined that they are not a citizen they can be expelled for any reason at any time. Plenary power, bitch.
that judge needs to be hanged.
>They don't have a right to a trial. They have no rights except those granted under treaty with their home country.
Technically true of an illegal, but misleading in this case and the cases of others who seek asylum as refugees; they do in fact have a right to at least a trial.
Was she here illegally? She has no rights. She is not a subjugate of the constitution. She and her anchor baby can gtfo
>seeking asylum because of domestic and gang violence in their home countries
>El Salvador
Shame there wasn't a single damn other country within 3,000 miles of their home that they could've gone to for """asylum""", or else they could've saved themselves a long-ass trip through the desert.
Maybe it'd get the supreme Court off their lazy asses and make them do the fucking job
>Was she here illegally? She has no rights. She is not a subjugate of the constitution. She and her anchor baby can gtfo
Entirely false. The Constitution stipulates that all persons present in the US have a right to due process. That includes illegals. They are breaking the law and the standard procedure is deportation; that does not mean no trial is necessary.
Asylum means the are fleeing from an oppressive govt. Not gangs. These people come for the gibbs. Illegal=gtfo no questions.
Where does the constitution state that?
>walk into county
>claim "refugee" status
>walk free and gain the rights of a citizen
In what backwards ass Talmudic shithole does this make sense?
If they are here illegaly the constitution does not apply to them.
Non-citizens have no right to be in the country, this is an explicit part of every type of visa and legal residency. They can be thrown out whenever the executive says so. This is very clear under the law. Everything else is talmudic judicial bullshit that only stands because of a lack of will on the part of Congress and the Executive to tell them to get fucked.
Exactly. Illegals are not subjugates of the constitution.
deportation concerns the federal government, not the state, so this deranged, power tripping sack of shit can't follow up on any little bullshit "threat" they make. fuck off, shit huffing shill. kys.
The Constitution does not stipulate that at all. The Jewdiciary claims it does, but that is obvious bullshit and Trump needs to go full Jackson and ignore them and possibly jail them for abusing their position.
The fifth amendment specifies all persons, NOT citizens.
>No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
>nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
Like I said, they are breaking the law and with few exceptions they should be deported, but that to do so without a trial in which they may make their case violates our Constitution.
You are entirely wrong. Saying an incorrect thing as a statement does not make it true.
Non-citizens have a right to make their case before a judge even if they have entered illegally. They do not have a right to stay, but they have a right to try and convince the court otherwise before they're sent back.
Read the above passage, retard. No qualification of "citizen" or "American" is used, only "person".
paging doctor faggot.....paging doctor faggot. ..are yoh going to refute any of our claims (facts)?
>show up in America with a one-way plane ticket
>Claim asylum because of domestic abuse and gang violence
>"Ma husband hit me and ma cousin Jesus got shot" *sobs
>Asylum granted, welcome to America, please bring your family and have at least 3 kids
the biggest shift I've seen is the language from illegal immigrant to immigrant
the left has been successful at conflating the two, at least in the yes of gullible normies
No. You are wrong. Sorry bub.
There is mo such thing as illegal immigrant. A person is either here legally as an immigrant, or they are an illegal alien.
No one said they had to get approved, dumbass. What matters is the process is done legally and in a manner in which the defendant is allowed to defend themselves. And the problem here is Sessions attempted to prevent that, after making an official statement that he would not; he's acted in contempt of the court, which is why he's being threatened with contempt.
The qualification is unnecessary, the idea of the Constitution applying to anyone in the country for any reason is patently absurd. Do invading armies have a right to due process?
Do they have a right to bear arms? That one just says "the people" as well.
The whole premise is completely retarded and Trump needs to start removing judges.
You're so goddamn stupid it hurts.
Honestly that isn't entirely a bad thing, we need to stop (and reverse) almost all immigration anyway.
>If any federal judge's order can be ignored, guess how quickly that gets abused by anyone and everyone?
Good, we need to split this bullshit farce apart.
I don't take down criticism from Spanish-speakers, sorry.
Found a picture of this oven dodger
>legally as an immigrant, or they are an illegal alien.
agreed
pretty much, start with h1b
>>El Salvador
We get shitty clothing for Walmart from El Salvador, how could we take one of their subjects in for asylum? It's not like we're taking any British or other Europeans being persecuted for their speech by the tyrannical governments of Europe or Boers being murdered by Afro-Marxists, so we can't take asylum seekers just because their country is full of shitty Latin Americans.
supreme.justia.com
>Once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all persons within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.
>The Constitution stipulates that all persons present in the US have a right to due process
No it doesn't, show where it stipulates this.
You are evil and you know it
cis.org
A large percentage of aliens flee from removal proceedings — perhaps as many as 59 percent of all those released to await hearings. On a cost basis from the alien’s perspective, this makes sense. If you are in proceedings and have little chance of relief, why not treat the bond money (if it’s even required) as the cost of having been caught, and then flee, hoping to stay under the radar for as long as possible, perhaps until the next amnesty?
But muh due process. Kys.
Or maybe Congress could do its fucking job and reduce the powers and jurisdiction of the federal courts.
>>No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime
They're not being held for capital or infamous crimes, they're being detained and deported for unauthorized entry according to established procedure.
That is not the relevant part of the amendment.
>Though fashionable in the Obama administration, the exercise of “prosecutorial discretion” is problematic for ICE field officers. If the alien that they decline to remove goes on to commit a heinous act, they could be subject to lawsuits from victims and will be held accountable by their own agency (even if agency leadership encourages them to use the tool
>Even in today’s technology-driven world, charging an alien with immigration violations is a paperwork-intensive, cumbersome process that requires agents to fill out nearly 20 different forms each time.
Neither do I.
I'm so sick of these judges and legal bullshit *we can't do x because they need to do y but that violates z so I guess just deal with it goy". Just get these invaders OUT.
5-4 libshit decision with the conservatives in dissent. Ripe for reversal.
He’s right
The same kind of jewery was used to give corporations the right of people - the emancipation proclamation 13th amendment.
Good. Im so fucking sick of illegals. I was a first responder in am area with like 90 percent Hispanic and a shit ton were illegals. Straight up 3rd world cartel crime. Happening here. If people saw what i saw the southern border would be turned into the DMZ.
Again, that opinion is so transparently stupid that it should be aggressively ignored. The same logic would extend almost the entire Constitution to everyone who enters the nation's borders, and in many cases would extend it to aliens who have never entered the country at all.
>heh heh it doesn't specify that the right to peaceably assemble doesn't apply to invaders, goy!
Judges aren't allowed the same powers as air traffic controllers.
This district judge overreached by being under the delusion he could order a plane to turn around.
>Invaders
>Peaceably assemble
Do you read what you type or is it all just kind of improv?
Congress is actually the ultimate regulator of the courts, even the supreme court.
Congress could say Supreme Court can only have one seat and nothing the supreme court could do about it.
I don't disagree, but it's the current precedent. Just hope justices like (((Ginsburg))) who agreed with the majority opinion in 2001 croak so we can get people who actually understand the constitution on the supreme court.
Illegal aliens are invaders, faggot.
Honestly the USSC should just be replaced by Tay AI once we reboot her.
The Executive has no duty to follow that precedent. Jackson proved this. The Judiciary is extremely limited in its powers, and has no means to compel the Executive to do anything. If Trump overreaches it is up to Congress to do something about it.
nice argument, cuckboi. BBC will come for you.
I'm beyond sick of it. I can feel them closing in, there are hundreds of thousands of them invading our country and it's impossible to remove them with so many activist judges. It's humiliating to have our country invaded like this and have some disgusting judge keep us from fighting back. We've created so many laws that we're in a legal gridlock that will cause us to lose our nation.
The Constitution demands you follow the Constitution over any activist judge.
Read the Federalist Papers.
The Founding Fathers say if it is very clear that an activist judge has gone rogue, you should just start treating the judge's ruling as his opinions and not an actually legal ruling and wait for Congress to impeach the judge in the mean time.
>“In compliance with the court’s order, upon arrival in El Salvador, the plaintiffs did not disembark and were promptly returned to the United States,” a U.S. Department of Homeland Security official said Thursday evening.
Yeah but our government is full of cucks that follow these illegal orders anyway.
All true, plus only Congress can actually stop the Executive from doing anything. The Courts cannot impeach, they cannot indict, they can do absolutely nothing to the President (and he can pardon anyone of his people the courts try to interfere with).
All that is missing to solve this issue at once is willpower.
What's better is if Congress completely strips immigration away from the judicial branch.
en.wikipedia.org
"When Congress strips federal courts of jurisdiction, it exercises a valid legislative power no less than when it lays taxes, coins money, declares war, or invokes any other power that the Constitution grants it." - Clarence Thomas
Congress is full of faggots though
Plenty of people have said it's long past the time for both the executive and the legislative to fight back against rogue judges violating the separation of powers.
Plenty of cases where Trump should have ignored judges like the transgender military ban which was even worst in my opinion, since judges dared to actually rule themselves into being commander in chief and order around DoD employees, completly forgetting that judges are not to interefer in the chain of command of our armed forces and these activist judges even forget about the reason why we have military judges in the first place. It's because we considered it so criticize to make sure the judicial branch fucked off from the military like the founding fathers intended, we created military judges to handle military matters.
And guess what? In the end, Activist Civilian Judges in Civilian Courts pretty much insulted every military judge by placing a nationwide injunction against the military, pretty much intruding on the jurisdiction of military judges, and daring to order around the military even though they have no legal right and power to do so.
It's sheer arrogance. It makes me wonder if a rogue judge will place an injunction against the people in charge of launching nukes one day unless Congress or the Supreme Court ends this bullshit or the Executive starts ignoring unconstitutional rulings.
Well yeah, we wouldn't be in this position in the first place if Congress never confirmed these rogue judges.
Maybe Congress should start being like a business.
Order up a list of the bottom 10% worst performing judges with the highest amount of reversals and start impeaching them.
Congress should do a lot of things, but again, it's full of faggots. Voters need to stop voting in faggots.
Repeal the 17th Amendment.
en.wikipedia.org
Have Senators be selected by their state legislatures rather than by popular vote like the Founding Fathers originally intended.
Maybe then we would have a Senate that had balls again.
Since when is Congress only allowed to use impeachment to alter the federal judiciary? It can simply pass a judicial reform act.
Sessions needs to remain unbiased.
Trust Sessions.
I like that idea, but how do you convince massive fucking faggots to do something like that?
>Read the above passage, retard. No qualification of "citizen" or "American" is used, only "person".
Okay
>life, liberty, or property
Is this person being executed? Then they are not being deprived of life.
Is this person being imprisoned? Then they are not being deprived of liberty
Are this person's assets being siezed? Then they are not being deprived of property.
Whether they are Person or citizen is irrelevant.
Don't hold your breath.
Well, impeaching bars these rogue judges from government as well.
I guess if you want to go scorched earth, we could have Congress immediately dissolve all the lower courts which is completely constitutional by the way.
Congress could just say we don't need any lower courts and that would be completely constitutional.
We could just have state judges instead.