SCOTUS to hear

[BrightShinyGirl]

1. The decision won't be carefully considered or rational. It will be based on ideology with 1 weak kneed spineless craven coward controlling the final outcome.
2. Climate change is a political narrative and has no place in legal decisions.
3. Refugees and immigration are both political issues which don't belong in a legal decision.
4. The decision will not satisfy or resolve the issue for half of society who will refuse to accept it as final or binding.

You already know the Supreme Court won’t support Trump.

 

[HisArpy]

You already know the Supreme Court won’t support Trump.

I know no such thing. IN FACT, the SCOTUS has recently supported Trump in deportations of MS13, decided that the President has immunity for the things he does in office (which might come into play in the criminal contempt thing from Boasberg), and more.

But you go ahead and continue with your conspiracy theories.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

I know no such thing. IN FACT, the SCOTUS has recently supported Trump in deportations of MS13, decided that the President has immunity for the things he does in office (which might come into play in the criminal contempt thing from Boasberg), and more.

But you go ahead and continue with your conspiracy theories.

You’re already making excuses for Trump losing.

 

[John_von_Neumann]

The 1880's SCOTUS decision is a precedent dumb ass.

So is the 1890s SCOTUS decision, shit for brains.

 

[MajorRewrite]

3. Refugees and immigration are both political issues which don't belong in a legal decision.

Fake lawyers think there are no laws regarding refugees or immigration that could require decisions by courts.

 

[Politruk]

Children born to foreign diplomats and foreign military personnel stationed here in the US are NOT granted citizenship. That was settled by SCOTUS back in the 1880's. That being the case why would we grant citizenship to the children of fucking criminals and casual visitors?

Because the Constitution says so.

 

[Politruk]

What is it with you "progressives" that prevents you from acknowledging that illegal aliens are NOT the same as legal immigrants? They don't have the same standing or status and for good reason.

Actually, there isn't any good reason -- and that is entirely the fault of the Republicans -- not the pols but the voters. The whole system could have been made more rational back in 2007, but there was a grassroots revolt by rank-and-file Pubs against the bill.

 

[HisArpy]

Without a look ahead to more of what is happening now in quantity and severity, the ideologues the coward could set us up for a much bigger dumspter fire, such as forcing states and feds to just ignore laws and precedents as they try to find solutions.

Which is what the Blue States and Leftists are doing NOW.

California is attempting to coerce foreign countries to send their manufactured goods to California because Newsom is telling them that California won't charge them any tariffs.
Van Hollen violated the Logan Act when he went to try to influence El Salvador's foreign affairs with the US.

2 examples but there's plenty more where those came from.

Here's the thing most people are missing in all the dust and smoke. In the 1950's insurrectionists in Cuba helped Che Guevara and Fidel Castro bring in a militant army and overthrow the Cuban government. The result has been oppression and poverty for most of the people in that country, world wide condemnation, and bringing the world to the brink of nuclear war at least once.

NOW...

Ask yourself if importing millions of illegal migrants into the US and using them as political fodder in the social unrest that's been created is any different. ASK YOURSELF if the Democrat and Leftist/Progressive violence and threats against the law, Tesla, Trump, innocent MAGA hat wearers, and all the rest, supports the lawful government of the US, and adheres to the law, or not.

And then contrast and compare what happened in Cuba to what's happening NOW in the US.

Anyone who doesn't see the connection is either a fool or a participant in the attempted overthrow of the US government.

 

[Politruk]

Ask yourself if importing millions of illegal migrants into the US and using them as political fodder in the social unrest that's been created is

Nothing anyone has done. What are you even talking about?! Nobody but a coyote imports immigrants! And they don't create any social unrest! And only the GOP uses them as political fodder!

 

[Politruk]

Anyone who doesn't see the connection is either a fool or a participant in the attempted overthrow of the US government.

There is no connection, and it is not even clear what connection you are trying to draw. No one in the country, not even the Revolutionary Communists of America, believes immigrants can play any part in overthrowing the government, or would want to.

 

[HisArpy]

Nothing anyone has done. What are you even talking about?! Nobody but a coyote imports immigrants! And they don't create any social unrest! And only the GOP uses them as political fodder!

This is pure crap perpetuated by someone who is invested in the social divisiveness created by the current events surrounding illegal immigration.

 

[HisArpy]

There is no connection, and it is not even clear what connection you are trying to draw. No one in the country, not even the Revolutionary Communists of America, believes immigrants can play any part in overthrowing the government, or would want to.

Lol, either you're stupid, or you're a participant.

From my perspective, you're both.

 

[Politruk]

This is pure crap perpetuated by someone who is invested in the social divisiveness created by the current events surrounding illegal immigration.

The only social divisiveness is what the GOP has provoked, not what the immigrants have provoked -- and only the GOP is invested in it or profits by it.

 

[Hel_Books]

Van Hollen violated the Logan Act when he went to try to influence El Salvador's foreign affairs with the US.

Somebody's got to do it, considering that President Trump is now Nayib Bukele's bitch.

 

[HisArpy]

The only social divisiveness is what the GOP has provoked, not what the immigrants have provoked -- and only the GOP is invested in it or profits by it.

The GOP isn't destroying private property in the name of a political ideology.

The GOP isn't screaming at and threatening people eating dinner in a restaurant.

The GOP isn't rioting in the streets, looting, and committing arson.

And the GOP isn't pulling fire alarms to prevent congress from voting on a bill they oppose. Or violating the Logan Act by attempting to interfere with foreign policy negotiations conducted by the Executive Branch. Or "misplacing" BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars appropriated for helping the homeless. Or funding terrorist groups dedicated to the destruction and overthrow of the US government and death to all the people here.

That's all YOU and those YOU SUPPORT.

Which of course you will deny while still insisting that all of that is either not happening or it's being done by MAGA and the GOP.

Which is what makes you an idiot and a participant in the unlawful revolution against the people and government of the US.

 

[Hel_Books]

The GOP isn't destroying private property in the name of a political ideology.

The GOP isn't screaming at and threatening people eating dinner in a restaurant.

The GOP isn't rioting in the streets, looting, and committing arson.

I 'spec if you'd lost the election in 2024, like you did in 2020, there would have been some violence!

Now that you're in power, you do things like lock people up in jail in El Salvador without a trial. You've changed, and not for the better.

 

[HisArpy]

I 'spec if you'd lost the election in 2024, like you did in 2020, there would have been some violence!

Now that you're in power, you do things like lock people up in jail in El Salvador without a trial. You've changed, and not for the better.

You fantasies aren't real and basing your thoughts on phantasms and dreams is bad juju when you have to defend your actions.

"The Devil made me do it" defense hasn't ever worked for anyone.

As for Garcia, HE HAD TWO COURT HEARINGS before being deported to El Salvador. Where the government of El Salvador placed him BACK into jail where he was supposed to be before being released from prison to unlawfully enter the US.

He got his due process. The courts followed the law. He was LAWFULLY deported. What El Salvador does with him is an internal EL SALVADORAN matter and doesn't involve the United States or US law.

 

[Politruk]

The GOP isn't destroying private property in the name of a political ideology.

The GOP isn't screaming at and threatening people eating dinner in a restaurant.

The GOP isn't rioting in the streets, looting, and committing arson.

And the GOP isn't pulling fire alarms to prevent congress from voting on a bill they oppose. Or violating the Logan Act by attempting to interfere with foreign policy negotiations conducted by the Executive Branch. Or "misplacing" BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars appropriated for helping the homeless. Or funding terrorist groups dedicated to the destruction and overthrow of the US government and death to all the people here.

That's all YOU and those YOU SUPPORT.

Which of course you will deny while still insisting that all of that is either not happening or it's being done by MAGA and the GOP.

Which is what makes you an idiot and a participant in the unlawful revolution against the people and government of the US.

None of that has anything to do with immigrants.

And none of it has anything to do with revolution, either.

 

[Politruk]

As for Garcia, HE HAD TWO COURT HEARINGS before being deported to El Salvador.

That is a lie.

 

[Hel_Books]

You fantasies aren't real and basing your thoughts on phantasms and dreams is bad juju when you have to defend your actions.

"The Devil made me do it" defense hasn't ever worked for anyone.

As for Garcia, HE HAD TWO COURT HEARINGS before being deported to El Salvador. Where the government of El Salvador placed him BACK into jail where he was supposed to be before being released from prison to unlawfully enter the US.

He got his due process. The courts followed the law. He was LAWFULLY deported. What El Salvador does with him is an internal EL SALVADORAN matter and doesn't involve the United States or US law.

Somehow it seems strange that your "due process" resulted in a man convicted of no crime in either El Salvador or the USA ends up in a notorious prison. Obviously some fantasy "due process" of yours.

Perhaps President Trump can get him back to the USA, like the court ordered? Oh, wait, he can't, since Trump is now Nayib Bukele's bitch.

 

[HisArpy]

That is a lie.

“In 2019, two courts, an immigration court and an appellate immigration court, ruled that (Abrego Garcia) was a member of MS-13,”

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025...kilmar-abrego-garcias-el-salvador-deportation

So, not a lie.

 

[HisArpy]

None of that has anything to do with immigrants.

And none of it has anything to do with revolution, either.

Then why did you bring it up?

I'm thinking you were trying to deflect and failed at it so now you're trying to deflect again.

Which seems to be a thing with you when you're getting your ass handed to you.

 

[Rebel5soul]

Then why did you bring it up?

I'm thinking you were trying to deflect and failed at it so now you're trying to deflect again.

Which seems to be a thing with you when you're getting your ass handed to you.

They all do it. It's a wonder they don't get overly fatigued having to carry so much ass around all the time.

 

[Hel_Books]

Actually, the Al-Jazeera article says the exact opposite:

. . . US Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested Abrego Garcia in 2019 as he was looking for day labour outside a Home Depot store in Maryland. A police informant told police Abrego Garcia was an MS-13 member. Immigration judges denied Abrego Garcia bond, both initially and on appeal, citing the informant’s accusation. . .

The immigration judges’ decision to deny bond is not equivalent to ruling that Abrego Garcia was a gang member, David Bier, associate director of immigration studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, said.

In immigration bond hearings, detainees have the burden of proof to show they are neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community. Abrego Garcia “failed to meet his burden to show that he was not a danger,” Bier said. That’s not the same as the government proving affirmatively that he was an MS-13 member.

“The immigration judge is only taking at face value any evidence that the government provides,” Bier said. “It is not assessing its underlying validity at that stage.”

 

[HisArpy]

Actually, the Al-Jazeera article says the exact opposite:

. . . US Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested Abrego Garcia in 2019 as he was looking for day labour outside a Home Depot store in Maryland. A police informant told police Abrego Garcia was an MS-13 member. Immigration judges denied Abrego Garcia bond, both initially and on appeal, citing the informant’s accusation. . .

The immigration judges’ decision to deny bond is not equivalent to ruling that Abrego Garcia was a gang member, David Bier, associate director of immigration studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, said.

In immigration bond hearings, detainees have the burden of proof to show they are neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community. Abrego Garcia “failed to meet his burden to show that he was not a danger,” Bier said. That’s not the same as the government proving affirmatively that he was an MS-13 member.

“The immigration judge is only taking at face value any evidence that the government provides,” Bier said. “It is not assessing its underlying validity at that stage.”

^someone is grasping at straws and parsing the reference while omitting facts and details which defeat his entire argument.

From the article:

“In 2019, two courts, an immigration court and an appellate immigration court, ruled that (Abrego Garcia) was a member of MS-13,”

ALSO from the article:

In the initial denial, the judge said the determination of Abrego Garcia’s gang membership “appears to be trustworthy and is supported” by evidence

The court doesn't have to debunk the evidence, it merely has to assess whether that evidence exists or not. It's the job of the defense to debunk that evidence. If it can do so that means the court is required to weigh the credibility of the evidence and decide which version of facts to believe. In this case Garcia didn't provide ANY evidence refuting the government's claim he was a gang member and the court found that the evidence saying he was, credible.

THOSE are the facts.