The Alien Enemies Act - 1798

[HisArpy]

Not even close

He actually was here legally because the court found that his claims were credible


The same lawyer who argued his earlier credible asylum claims validated by the court


Nope


You're an idiot

The man was granted protection by the court for his asylum claims, which is why he was here legally. He is not a gang member at all which continues to be the administration tag line

You should have read the article instead of regurgitating your lies, er, talking fabrications, er, whatever the fuck you think the wool is that you're pulling over your own eyes.

So, in a nutshell:

1. He came here ILLEGALLY, was caught and given a court date before being released into the US.
2. At his court hearing (due process!) he was deemed not credible in his claims and ordered removed. (Which means your statement that he was granted asylum is a LIE! Imagine that, you lie again and again and again and somehow believe that you're getting away with it. No fucking wonder your side of society is getting trounced right now legally and socially.)
3. Another judge (in violation of the FRCP rules) put a hold on that removal order. (MORE due process!!) This is not asylum.
4. He was removed anyway. (because the hold was placed unlawfully)
5. He hired lawyers to challenge his removal. (Three times is the charm for due process!!!)
6. The final challenge resulted in a judge hearing a matter over which the court has NO JURISDICTION under the law. (Wow. Can you imagine that? He's getting even more due process even though he's not entitled to it at this point.)
7. He's a Salvadoran national and the US has no physical custody of his person or legal jurisdiction over him. Thus the current order for his return is UNLAWFUL as well as being legally impossible to comply with.


Here's the part that really needs to be paid attention to, by everyone INCLUDING the DOJ.

The lawyers who filed the original challenge to the removal order need reported to the Bar Association for ethical violations for filing a frivolous pleading. The judge who heard that case and placed a hold on the removal order needs removed from the bench for failure to uphold the law. The current lawyers need reported to the Bar Association for ethical violations for filing meritless and frivolous pleadings AND should be sanctioned by the court for same. They should also be required to pay the costs of the meritless action. The judge needs reported to the Judicial Ethics Board for failure to uphold the law.

 

[ll74]

You should have read the article instead of regurgitating your lies, er, talking fabrications, er, whatever the fuck you think the wool is that you're pulling over your own eyes.

He claimed asylum and was granted asylum.

So, in a nutshell:

1. He came here ILLEGALLY, was caught and given a court date before being released into the US.

Nope

2. At his court hearing (due process!) he was deemed not credible in his claims and ordered removed. (Which means your statement that he was granted asylum is a LIE! Imagine that, you lie again and again and again and somehow believe that you're getting away with it. No fucking wonder your side of society is getting trounced right now legally and socially.)

Nope

3. Another judge (in violation of the FRCP rules) put a hold on that removal order. (MORE due process!!) This is not asylum.

Nope

4. He was removed anyway. (because the hold was placed unlawfully)

Nope

5. He hired lawyers to challenge his removal. (Three times is the charm for due process!!!)

Nope

6. The final challenge resulted in a judge hearing a matter over which the court has NO JURISDICTION under the law. (Wow. Can you imagine that? He's getting even more due process even though he's not entitled to it at this point.)

Nope

7. He's a Salvadoran national and the US has no physical custody of his person or legal jurisdiction over him. Thus the current order for his return is UNLAWFUL as well as being legally impossible to comply with.

He is an asylum seeker who has a valid asylum claims

Here's the part that really needs to be paid attention to, by everyone INCLUDING the DOJ.

The lawyers who filed the original challenge to the removal order need reported to the Bar Association for ethical violations for filing a frivolous pleading. The judge who heard that case and placed a hold on the removal order needs removed from the bench for failure to uphold the law. The current lawyers need reported to the Bar Association for ethical violations for filing meritless and frivolous pleadings AND should be sanctioned by the court for same. They should also be required to pay the costs of the meritless action. The judge needs reported to the Judicial Ethics Board for failure to uphold the law.

Blaming the lawyer. Fun


He was here because he claimed asylum and was granted protections.

Tomorrow, bB will claim I'm here illegally. Next week ICE will come to get me and send me to gitmo. Next week you'll support their claim and tell everyone they are wrong for believing otherwise.

And you'll celebrate this horseshit.
The government has never supported their deportation claims for Garcia

AND YOU SUPPORT THIS.

 

[HisArpy]

He claimed asylum and was granted asylum.

PROVEN lie.

The rest of your drivel is more of the same.

 

[ll74]

PROVEN lie.

Nope

The rest of your drivel is more of the same.

Nope. Nothing in your article from Red State provides evidence of your claim

 

[Rightguide]

A judge has ordered the return of Garcia.
The Administration is defying the ruling
Of course they are.
A reminder, Garcia was legally here.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...p-deportation-el-salvador-prison/82865362007/

The judge has zero jurisdiction in this case see 8 USC 1252g:

(g)Exclusive jurisdiction
Except as provided in this section and notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), including section 2241 of title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, and sections 1361 and 1651 of such title, no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this chapter.

This case and the Judge's faulty reasoning will be thrown out by the Appellate Court. Garcia will not be returned to the United States nor should he be.

 

[HisArpy]

Nope


Nope. Nothing in your article from Red State provides evidence of your claim

^somebody didn't read the article and is in denial.

Either that or he's gone full Sgt Spidey where plain words on the screen don't exist if he doesn't like what they say.

 

[ll74]

^somebody didn't read the article and is in denial.

He has never been proven to be a member of M13.

Either that or he's gone full Sgt Spidey where plain words on the screen don't exist if he doesn't like what they say.

Lol

 

[Rightguide]

He has never been proven to be a member of M13.

Lol

8 USC 1252g

no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this chapter.

 

[HisArpy]

He has never been proven to be a member of M13.

Lol

Lol. That's a red herring. It wasn't necessary to prove his membership in MS13 since he ALREADY HAD AN ORDER FOR REMOVAL issued by an immigration judge.

 

[ll74]

Lol. That's a red herring. It wasn't necessary to prove his membership in MS13 since he ALREADY HAD AN ORDER FOR REMOVAL issued by an immigration judge.

He came here claiming asylum and was granted asylee status.

He was then removed without evidence.

If a judge ordering a removal is important to you, why wouldn't a judge ordering his return?

 

[HisArpy]

He came here claiming asylum and was granted asylee status.

LIE!

He was then removed without evidence.

LIE!

If a judge ordering a removal is important to you, why wouldn't a judge ordering his return?

Because the judge has NO JURISDICTION pursuant to Federal Law to do so. The Rule of Law is what matters here, not your beliefs.

 

[ll74]

LIE!

Nope

LIE!

Nope

Because the judge has NO JURISDICTION pursuant to Federal Law to do so. The Rule of Law is what matters here, not your beliefs.

The administration refuses to even attempt to bring a person, who was mistakingly sent to a torture prison, back under direction of a judge.

 

[HisArpy]

Nope

Like I said, it's a LIE!

Garcia, a citizen of El Salvador, who is portrayed as a "Maryland father" in most news reports, entered the US illegally in 2011. In 2019, he was arrested on allegations of membership in the violent Salvadoran gang called Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13. At that time, he applied for political asylum, which was denied

See article: https://redstate.com/streiff/2025/0...nt-undo-a-perfectly-good-deportation-n2187538

Nope

Again, it's a LIE!

He was given an order of removal,

See article https://redstate.com/streiff/2025/0...nt-undo-a-perfectly-good-deportation-n2187538

The administration refuses to even attempt to bring a person, who was mistakingly sent to a torture prison, back under direction of a judge.

You constantly bring up dthis bullshit in an effort to try to show something but you refuse to accept that in some cases there's no lawful jurisdiction because CONGRESS limited that to specific courts of law and NO OTHER COURT CAN HEAR THOSE CASES.

See:

8 USC 1252:

(a)(2) Matters not subject to judicial review
(A) Review relating to section 1225(b)(1)

(a)(2)Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), including section 2241 of title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, and sections 1361 and 1651 of such title, no court shall have jurisdiction to review-

(i) except as provided in subsection (e), any individual determination or to entertain any other cause or claim arising from or relating to the implementation or operation of an order of removal pursuant to section 1225(b)(1) of this title,


(f) Limit on injunctive relief
(1) In general

Regardless of the nature of the action or claim or of the identity of the party or parties bringing the action, no court (other than the Supreme Court) shall have jurisdiction or authority to enjoin or restrain the operation of the provisions of part IV of this subchapter, as amended by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, other than with respect to the application of such provisions to an individual alien against whom proceedings under such part have been initiated.


(g) Exclusive jurisdiction

Except as provided in this section and notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), including section 2241 of title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, and sections 1361 and 1651 of such title, no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this chapter.


Linky for you if you want to verify that I C&P'd the text accurately

Basically, you're full of shit in regards to your entire argument. You lie in an effort to make claims to support your bullshit and you refuse to acknowledge that you're wrong even when faced with truth and the law as written.

 

[ll74]

Like I said, it's a LIE!





Again, it's a LIE!





You constantly bring up dthis bullshit in an effort to try to show something but you refuse to accept that in some cases there's no lawful jurisdiction because CONGRESS limited that to specific courts of law and NO OTHER COURT CAN HEAR THOSE CASES.

See:

8 USC 1252:

(a)(2) Matters not subject to judicial review
(A) Review relating to section 1225(b)(1)

(a)(2)Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), including section 2241 of title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, and sections 1361 and 1651 of such title, no court shall have jurisdiction to review-

(i) except as provided in subsection (e), any individual determination or to entertain any other cause or claim arising from or relating to the implementation or operation of an order of removal pursuant to section 1225(b)(1) of this title,


(f) Limit on injunctive relief
(1) In general

Regardless of the nature of the action or claim or of the identity of the party or parties bringing the action, no court (other than the Supreme Court) shall have jurisdiction or authority to enjoin or restrain the operation of the provisions of part IV of this subchapter, as amended by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, other than with respect to the application of such provisions to an individual alien against whom proceedings under such part have been initiated.


(g) Exclusive jurisdiction

Except as provided in this section and notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), including section 2241 of title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, and sections 1361 and 1651 of such title, no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this chapter.


Linky for you if you want to verify that I C&P'd the text accurately

Basically, you're full of shit in regards to your entire argument. You lie in an effort to make claims to support your bullshit and you refuse to acknowledge that you're wrong even when faced with truth and the law as written.

The administration admitted their mistake, of deporting a protected person. The administration is not making an effort to correct their mistake because the administration is more interested in dehumanizing immigrants.


They have consistently lied about the person to deflect from their actions.

You like that they do so, and so you prefer to ignore their abhorrent behavior

 

[HisArpy]

The administration admitted their mistake, of deporting a protected person. The administration is not making an effort to correct their mistake because the administration is more interested in dehumanizing immigrants.


They have consistently lied about the person to deflect from their actions.

You like that they do so, and so you prefer to ignore their abhorrent behavior

This is irrelevant to the issue that the court has NO JURISDICTION and NO AUTHORITY to order ANYTHING in regards to Garcia.

THAT is The Law. You whinging about it changes nothing and only serves to prove that you cannot admit that you're wrong and have been conned by your own ideology into believing lies.

 

[ll74]

This is irrelevant to the issue that the court has NO JURISDICTION and NO AUTHORITY to order ANYTHING in regards to Garcia.

The administration admitted to mistakingly deporting a protected human being and refuses to make an effort to get him back because they are more interested in dehumanizing him.

THAT is The Law. You whinging about it changes nothing and only serves to prove that you cannot admit that you're wrong and have been conned by your own ideology into believing lies.

You like this because you also dehumanize migrants.

 

[Rightguide]

This is irrelevant to the issue that the court has NO JURISDICTION and NO AUTHORITY to order ANYTHING in regards to Garcia.

THAT is The Law. You whinging about it changes nothing and only serves to prove that you cannot admit that you're wrong and have been conned by your own ideology into believing lies.

I mean to tell ya, 74 has an Adamantium frontal lobe.

 

[Rightguide]

The administration admitted to mistakingly deporting a protected human being and refuses to make an effort to get him back because they are more interested in dehumanizing him.


You like this because you also dehumanize migrants.

Garcia has no right to a hearing before a Federal District Court, and the Judge in this case has no jurisdiction to hear it.

 

[HisArpy]

I mean to tell ya, 74 has an Adamantium frontal lobe.

I think he's a Sgt Spidey Alt or vice versa. Same troll farm, different chair.

 

[ll74]

Garcia has no right to a hearing before a Federal District Court, and the Judge in this case has no jurisdiction to hear it.

The administration admitted their mistake by removing a protected person. The administration is refusing to make an effort to address that mistake because the administration is more interested in dehumanizing the person.

You like this because your God guy told you to.

 

[HisArpy]

The administration admitted their mistake by removing a protected person. The administration is refusing to make an effort to address that mistake because the administration is more interested in dehumanizing the person.

You like this because your God guy told you to.

Irrelevant. He was removed pursuant to a LAWFUL removal order. The later hold on that order was UNLAWFUL and the new court has NO JURISDICTION to hear the matter OR to demand the Government do anything.

You have no cards.

 

[ll74]

Irrelevant.

To you
Yes

He was removed pursuant to a LAWFUL removal order. The later hold on that order was UNLAWFUL and the new court has NO JURISDICTION to hear the matter OR to demand the Government do anything.

The judge has yet to rule on his case.

You have no cards.

Sounds familiar.....thanks JD

 

[Rightguide]

The administration admitted their mistake by removing a protected person. The administration is refusing to make an effort to address that mistake because the administration is more interested in dehumanizing the person.

You like this because your God guy told you to.

This isn’t about personal preference, it’s a matter of law. What we’re witnessing is a coordinated effort by a subset of subversive leftist judges to obstruct the lawful execution of President Trump’s Article II authority, effectively undermining the expressed will of the American people. These judicial maneuvers not only violate statutory law but also blatantly disregard the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In particular, the misuse of temporary restraining orders (TROs) in this context constitutes a clear breach of Rule 65(c), and, in this case, directly conflicts with 8 U.S.C. § 1252. The rule of law is not a partisan instrument, and it’s being willfully bent to sabotage constitutional governance.

 

[ll74]

This isn’t about personal preference, it’s a matter of law. What we’re witnessing is a coordinated effort by a subset of subversive leftist judges to obstruct the lawful execution of President Trump’s Article II authority, effectively undermining the expressed will of the American people. These judicial maneuvers not only violate statutory law but also blatantly disregard the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In particular, the misuse of temporary restraining orders (TROs) in this context constitutes a clear breach of Rule 65(c), and, in this case, directly conflicts with 8 U.S.C. § 1252. The rule of law is not a partisan instrument, and it’s being willfully bent to sabotage constitutional governance.

The administration admitted to mistakingly sending a person here legally to a torture prison in El salvador. A judge has ordered his return and the administration refuses to make an effort because they prefer to dehumanize him and lie about him.

You like that because your God guy told you to.

 

[HisArpy]

To you
Yes

Absolutely to me. I do, after all, stand for the law. You can take your fee fees and get fucked for all I care.

The judge has yet to rule on his case.

The judge HAS NO AUTHORITY TO DO ANYTHING. He can't even hear the case at all. What part of that don't you understand?

Sounds familiar.....thanks JD

You're welcome. Next time you actually want to debate facts instead of lies, come back and we'll have a go at it.