The Alien Enemies Act - 1798

[ll74]

The government cannot deport American CITIZENS because to do so requires stripping them of their citizenship and the government CANNOT DO THAT absent specific limited circumstances.

How would you know without due process, fuckhead?

Thus your hypothetical is just fearmongering hyperbole.

The act allows them to deport without due process, which is the issue I continue to have.

If the government says you aren't a citizen, unless someone checks that, then you aren't

 

[ll74]

Which means you were wrong when you said they had due process rights.



They either did or they had a notice to appear issued to them. Those who didn't get that because they didn't come here through one of the border checkpoints, F 'em.



SCOTUS just said differently. The Court said that those arrested under the AEA only have a right of Habeas to challenge their inclusion in the class. That challenge is going to be limited to whether they're members of TdA or not. It's not going to extend to anything else and regardless of whether they are or aren't TdA, if they're here illegally they're gone anyway.

So you're wrong yet again.

Lol
The court has rules that the government must give proper notice and allow a person to challenge the accusation.

There's a reason they specifically made that a requirement... dip shit

 

[ll74]

The government cannot deport American CITIZENS because to do so requires stripping them of their citizenship and the government CANNOT DO THAT absent specific limited circumstances.

Thus your hypothetical is just fearmongering hyperbole.

It is quite fun to hear you basically asserting that we should trust the government

Especially in the case of Garcia where they literally admitted that they fucked up - UNDER OATH

 

[HisArpy]

How would you know without due process, fuckhead?


The act allows them to deport without due process, which is the issue I continue to have.

If the government says you aren't a citizen, unless someone checks that, then you aren't

It doesn't work like that. Statutory law, Constitutional law, and precedent prohibit the government from doing what you spew on and on and on about. Absent specific circumstances, the government cannot strip a US CITIZEN of their citizenship.

Good luck arguing against that with your lame "you don't get any due process!" mantra.

 

[HisArpy]

Lol
The court has rules that the government must give proper notice and allow a person to challenge the accusation.

There's a reason they specifically made that a requirement... dip shit

The court specifically said they can only challenge their inclusion in the "class."

It said NOTHING about challenging the accusations against them because those challenges cannot be brought via Habeas.

This is why lawyers are necessary - people don't understand the nuances of the law so they just lump everything together and think they're right. When in reality, they're wrong on many levels.

Like you are here.

 

[HisArpy]

It is quite fun to hear you basically asserting that we should trust the government

Especially in the case of Garcia where they literally admitted that they fucked up - UNDER OATH

No one trusts the government.

OTOH, the law requires that the government act within the rules. Failure to do that results in the people taking back their power of governance. Like what happened in 1776 and again in 1860.

These deportations don't rise to that level. It's not even close.

 

[ll74]

No one trusts the government.

Lol

OTOH, the law requires that the government act within the rules. Failure to do that results in the people taking back their power of governance. Like what happened in 1776 and again in 1860.

Scotus called out habeas for a reason.

These deportations don't rise to that level. It's not even close.

They do. You just don't care that they do.

 

[ll74]

It doesn't work like that. Statutory law, Constitutional law, and precedent prohibit the government from doing what you spew on and on and on about. Absent specific circumstances, the government cannot strip a US CITIZEN of their citizenship.

Good luck arguing against that with your lame "you don't get any due process!" mantra.

It does work like that.
The government put people on a plane to El Salvador without demonstrating to anyone that they should be on that plane.
That literally is why the.alien act.exists.

Emergency powers exist for when the executive decides that they can't wait for Congress or the courts to act.

Which is also why they are temporary

 

[Rightguide]

I have one question for the righties here- if a left leaning President decides that the Proud Boys were at war with America, does that allow him to deport American citizens who are part of the proud boys?

The Enemy Alien Act does not apply to American Citizens.

 

[Rightguide]

Lol


Scotus called out habeas for a reason.

The reason being U.S. District Judge James Boasberg was so fucked up in his analysis of the law the SCOTUS couldn't even get to the point of ruling on an argument against the Alien Enemies Act. His court being the wrong venue for a habeas hearing.

 

[ll74]

The reason being U.S. District Judge James Boasberg was so fucked up in his analysis of the law the SCOTUS couldn't even get to the point of ruling on an argument against the Alien Enemies Act. His court being the wrong venue for a habeas hearing.

The reason being that the administration didn't provide habeas to those they were deporting

 

[ll74]

The Enemy Alien Act does not apply to American Citizens.

The act allows the administration to avoid demonstrating their reasoning for deportation.

That seems to be your lack of understanding.

Many already deported folks had no habeas....hence the issue and why SCOTUS spelled it out

 

[Rightguide]

The reason being that the administration didn't provide habeas to those they were deporting

Read the decision.

 

[ll74]

Read the decision.

I did.
Moron. Due process is required for everyone.
Without it, they could deport you.

For whatever reason, you think you're protected.

At any moment, they could fuck up and deport you.
And then you'll be the same as Garcia.
O

 

[Rightguide]

I did.
Moron. Due process is required for everyone.
Without it, they could deport you.

For whatever reason, you think you're protected.

At any moment, they could fuck up and deport you.
And then you'll be the same as Garcia.
O

Your problem is, you don't know what due process is. You think you do, but you don't.

 

[Rightguide]

The reason being that the administration didn't provide habeas to those they were deporting

From the AG:

“[Boasberg] is not canceling the hearing, he is continuing on with the hearing. But the Supreme Court has spoken loud and clear. He has no jurisdiction, that flight will remain in El Salvador, those inmates, those violent gang members, those violent alien enemies will remain in El Salvador,” Bondi said. “He cannot get them back. So his jurisdiction is over. So we’ll see what he says today at 3 p.m., but going forward, these terrorists better look out.”

 

[ll74]

From the AG:

“[Boasberg] is not canceling the hearing, he is continuing on with the hearing. But the Supreme Court has spoken loud and clear. He has no jurisdiction, that flight will remain in El Salvador, those inmates, those violent gang members, those violent alien enemies will remain in El Salvador,” Bondi said. “He cannot get them back. So his jurisdiction is over. So we’ll see what he says today at 3 p.m., but going forward, these terrorists better look out.”

If Garland made that statement, I doubt you'd even quote it

Dipshit

 

[Rightguide]

If Garland made that statement, I doubt you'd even quote it

Dipshit

Due process under the AEA is contained in its text. It's the government presents an sworn affidavit to a federal Immigration court Judge, testifying the person has been declared an alien enemy by the President, he is a foreign national here illegally, who is between the ages of 14 and 65, and is subject to deportation, that he is not a Green Card Holder or an American citizen. That's it.

 

[ll74]

Due process under the AEA is contained in its text.

Nope

It's the government presents an sworn affidavit to a federal Immigration court Judge, testifying the person has been declared an alien enemy by the President, he is a foreign national here illegally, who is between the ages of 14 and 65, and is subject to deportation, that he is not a Green Card Holder or an American citizen. That's it.

Nope

You're an idiot


It's almost as if you skip words saying that we are at war with a nation rather than a gang

The government openly admitted to deporting a person who wasn't what they said he was...under oath. And that person had no ability to dispute their claim....THAT IS WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT

The government literally disappeared this guy and now say they have no ability to get him back

What if that was you or a friend or family member of yours?

 

[Rightguide]

Nope


Nope

You're an idiot


It's almost as if you skip words saying that we are at war with a nation rather than a gang

The government openly admitted to deporting a person who wasn't what they said he was...under oath. And that person had no ability to dispute their claim....THAT IS WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT

The government literally disappeared this guy and now say they have no ability to get him back

What if that was you or a friend or family member of yours?

You're uneducated.

 

[ll74]

You're uneducated.

Hundred of human beings were deported without any ability to challenge.

What part of that are you missing here?

And even if this guy deserved to be deported......as you GLEEFULLY CELEBRATE....he literally cannot argue his case...because he's gone for good.

The bottom line is that you believe people that you don't like don't deserve to be treated as human beings.

 

[HisArpy]

You're uneducated.

He's become fanatical in his litany.

 

[HisArpy]

It's almost as if you skip words saying that we are at war with a nation rather than a gang.

This is NOT what the SCOTUS determined just yesterday. It's your version of reality that was resoundingly rejected by the High Court.

The government openly admitted to deporting a person who wasn't what they said he was...under oath. And that person had no ability to dispute their claim....THAT IS WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT

No it wasn't.

The decision yesterday was whether the DC courts had jurisdiction and/or could enjoin the Administration over the use of the AEA. The courts clearly stated they weren't deciding that matter and instead clarified that the lower district courts do not have jurisdiction to hear the claims being made and that the ONLY things that could be heard were petitions for Habeas relief and those MUST BE in the venue where the petitioner is being held by the appropriate court having jurisdiction; ie, the immigration courts.

The court also said that the Administration had the power to invoke the AEA and had done so pursuant to a declaration from the Administration as required.

The government literally disappeared this guy and now say they have no ability to get him back

What if that was you or a friend or family member of yours?

Emotional appeal is not law. It doesn't win you legal points and actual results in you losing style points too. Good advocacy doesn't need to use either sympathy or fear to argue the issues.

 

[Rightguide]

This is NOT what the SCOTUS determined just yesterday. It's your version of reality that was resoundingly rejected by the High Court.



No it wasn't.

The decision yesterday was whether the DC courts had jurisdiction and/or could enjoin the Administration over the use of the AEA. The courts clearly stated they weren't deciding that matter and instead clarified that the lower district courts do not have jurisdiction to hear the claims being made and that the ONLY things that could be heard were petitions for Habeas relief and those MUST BE in the venue where the petitioner is being held by the appropriate court having jurisdiction; ie, the immigration courts.

The court also said that the Administration had the power to invoke the AEA and had done so pursuant to a declaration from the Administration as required.



Emotional appeal is not law. It doesn't win you legal points and actual results in you losing style points too. Good advocacy doesn't need to use either sympathy or fear to argue the issues.

I'm afraid what we're witnessing with 74 is a steady unraveling of his cognitive discipline. He reads legal decisions like headlines, loud, simple, and stripped of context, completely missing the layers of precedent, statutory interplay, and judicial restraint. Where the law speaks in gradients, he sees only black and white. The subtleties of jurisdiction, procedural posture, and constitutional interpretation sail clean over his head, and are casually dismissed as irrelevant or partisan bias. He can’t distinguish a narrow holding from a sweeping principle. In the courtroom of his mind, complexity is heresy, and nuance is nothing more than noise he was never trained to understand.

 

[ll74]

I'm afraid what we're witnessing with 74 is a steady unraveling of his cognitive discipline. He reads legal decisions like headlines, loud, simple, and stripped of context, completely missing the layers of precedent, statutory interplay, and judicial restraint. Where the law speaks in gradients, he sees only black and white. The subtleties of jurisdiction, procedural posture, and constitutional interpretation sail clean over his head, and are casually dismissed as irrelevant or partisan bias. He can’t distinguish a narrow holding from a sweeping principle. In the courtroom of his mind, complexity is heresy, and nuance is nothing more than noise he was never trained to understand.

You're admitting that you want people you dislike to be treated like non humans.

All of your arguments stem from that. You truly don't give a shit about the law as long as people you hate are the target.