The Alien Enemies Act - 1798

[Rotadom]

Typical circular bullshit from those on the Left. All anyone needs to do is read your posts to understand EXACTLY what you stand for.

You've read all of my posts and you're still clueless as to what I stand for.

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

The reason is we have enemy aliens in our midst. Relevant legal text (50 U.S.C. § 21)

"Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, "or" any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation thereof, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being male of the age of fourteen years and upwards, who are within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies."

It also allows enforcement if the U.S. is invaded or threatened, which does not necessarily require a formal war declaration. All that is required is the president issue a public proclamation for the law to take effect.

Predatory Incursion…that’s the money shot.

BTW, just saw this law has been enacted three times….twice in peacetime. All the lefts talking points are out the window.

 

[Rightguide]

Predatory Incursion…that’s the money shot.

BTW, just saw this law has been enacted three times….twice in peacetime. All the lefts talking points are out the window.

It's not as if it were dragged out of a closet. It's always been there, written by the founding generation to assure the Executive had all of the authority he would need to repel undesirables from our shores. The Left is illiterate on US history because they were propagandized by left-wing interpretations that helped to promote their unconstitutional policy goals into the future.

 

[MajorRewrite]

BTW, just saw this law has been enacted three times….twice in peacetime. All the lefts talking points are out the window.

Nope.

The Alien Enemies Act has been invoked three times, each time during a major conflict: the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II. In World Wars I and II, the law was a key authority behind detentions, expulsions, and restrictions targeting German, Austro-Hungarian, Japanese, and Italian immigrants based solely on their ancestry. The law is best known for its role in Japanese internment, a shameful part of U.S. history for which Congress, presidents, and the courts have apologized.

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

Nope.

Do you even read the articles you post?

Woodrow Wilson and Harry S. Truman continued using the law after the cessation of hostilities in World Wars I and II. World War I ended in 1918, but the Wilson administration used the law to intern German and Austro-Hungarian immigrants until 1920. And World War II ended in 1945, but the Truman administration used the law for internment and deportations until 1951. In its 1948 Ludecke v. Watkins opinion, a narrow majority of the Supreme Court upheld the Truman administration’s extended reliance on the Alien Enemies Act, reasoning that it was not the judiciary’s place to second-guess the president on a matter as “political” as when a war terminates and wartime authorities expire.

I know you simpleton democrats struggle with dates and historical events. I’m here to help. You’re welcome.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Exactly.......it only applies to citizens

"In the US, due process, guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, ensures fair legal proceedings and protects individuals from government actions that deprive them of life, liberty, or property without following established rules and principles."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process

Go argue with Cornell. I'm pretty sure they know a whole lot more about your constitution than you do....*chuckles*

Fuck I'm not an American but I obviously know way more about your country, than you know about anything....But I'll bet you can co-ordinate an outfit like nobody's business. Maybe stick to what you're good at.....

 

[MajorRewrite]

Do you even read the articles you post?



I know you simpleton democrats struggle with dates and historical events. I’m here to help. You’re welcome.

Ignorant MAGA sheep desperately tried to make a point. The two examples you pointed to were initiated in wartime. Doddering Donnie is trying to use it when there is no war.

I hope that helps, sheep.

 

[HisArpy]

I truly don't understand why due process can't be afforded except that our administration wants to expedite without question and/or they are rounding up actual citizens or people who should not be included in deportations.

They are already being deported.

Because the law doesn't authorize it in some instances.

Due process isn't universal. Just like the requirement of a warrant isn't universal (exigent circumstances), or your 5th Amendment right not to be forced to testify against yourself (mandatory DNA testing), due process can be denied if the law doesn't allow for it.

It's not that difficult to understand unless you just don't want to.

 

[ll74]

Because the law doesn't authorize it in some instances.

Due process isn't universal. Just like the requirement of a warrant isn't universal (exigent circumstances), or your 5th Amendment right not to be forced to testify against yourself (mandatory DNA testing), due process can be denied if the law doesn't allow for it.

It's not that difficult to understand unless you just don't want to.

I do understand it very clearly. The administration does not want to have to prove that a person is warranted for deportation before a court. They don't want to take time to ensure they didn't fuck up and deport an American citizen. They don't want transparency and they don't want to be scrutinized for their actions.

 

[HisArpy]

I do understand it very clearly. The administration does not want to have to prove that a person is warranted for deportation before a court. They don't want to take time to ensure they didn't fuck up and deport an American citizen. They don't want transparency and they don't want to be scrutinized for their actions.

This is where you keep fucking up.

The administration is FOLLOWING THE LAW. That you don't like the law in question isn't meaningful in any way except that you refuse to accept that reality.

 

[ll74]

This is where you keep fucking up.

The administration is FOLLOWING THE LAW. That you don't like the law in question isn't meaningful in any way except that you refuse to accept that reality.

Not fucking up - the administration is using a wartime act improperly to hide what they are doing.

 

[HisArpy]

Not fucking up - the administration is using a wartime act improperly to hide what they are doing.

It's not improper just because that's what you want to believe.

It is, however, lawful. And that's what really chapping your ass.

 

[ll74]

It's not improper just because that's what you want to believe.

It is because no nation or country is at war or is invading us.

It is, however, lawful. And that's what really chapping your ass.

It is abuse of power

 

[HisArpy]

It is because no nation or country is at war or is invading us.


It is abuse of power

This is what you WANT to believe.

The executive has the duty and authority under the Constitution to "faithfully execute the laws of the land." Guess what; the AEA is "the law of the land." Using the law isn't abuse of power.

So, under his duty and authority, the President can invoke the AEA and use it to do what you object to. And it's your continuing objection which is driving your narrative, not wisdom or intellect or logic.

 

[ll74]

This is what you WANT to believe.

The executive has the duty and authority under the Constitution to "faithfully execute the laws of the land." Guess what; the AEA is "the law of the land." Using the law isn't abuse of power.

So, under his duty and authority, the President can invoke the AEA and use it to do what you object to. And it's your continuing objection which is driving your narrative, not wisdom or intellect or logic.

I actually am pissed that, based on other actions this administration has performed, it's highly likely that people who shouldn't be deported will be sent to horrible prisons.

But if you think accidentally sending A.erican citizens to a jail in El Salvador because of an errant keyword search doesn't deserve scrutiny and transparency,ore power to you.

 

[HisArpy]

I actually am pissed that, based on other actions this administration has performed, it's highly likely that people who shouldn't be deported will be sent to horrible prisons.

But if you think accidentally sending A.erican citizens to a jail in El Salvador because of an errant keyword search doesn't deserve scrutiny and transparency,ore power to you.

This assumes a lot of somethings which, so far, have not happened.

 

[ll74]

This assumes a lot of somethings which, so far, have not happened.

How would you even know? That is my point. They shipped hundreds of people to the prison without anything but their word that they got the right people.

The same administration that had to review workers who ended up being essential to government functions like nuclear material handling.

But sure, they have no reason to lie.

 

[Lance_Castro]

Enola Gay was such a fag.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

This is where you keep fucking up.

The administration is FOLLOWING THE LAW. That you don't like the law in question isn't meaningful in any way except that you refuse to accept that reality.

Lots of judges keep saying they’re not following the law.

 

[DeluxAuto]

How do they know who are gang members without due process?

By looks? Tattoos?

 

[whiskeytangofoxtrot]

Because the law doesn't authorize it in some instances.

Due process isn't universal. Just like the requirement of a warrant isn't universal (exigent circumstances), or your 5th Amendment right not to be forced to testify against yourself (mandatory DNA testing), due process can be denied if the law doesn't allow for it.

It's not that difficult to understand unless you just don't want to.

correction, The US Constitution and its amendments protect the rights of both citizens and non-citizens. While the right to vote is exclusive to citizens, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee due process to all persons within US jurisdiction. This includes non-citizens, even those in the country illegally. Procedural law, which governs the methods and rules of court proceedings, is derived from these due process guarantees. In the US, procedural law takes the form of rules and practices that guide federal and state courts in civil and criminal trials.

 

[HisArpy]

correction, The US Constitution and its amendments protect the rights of both citizens and non-citizens. While the right to vote is exclusive to citizens, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee due process to all persons within US jurisdiction. This includes non-citizens, even those in the country illegally. Procedural law, which governs the methods and rules of court proceedings, is derived from these due process guarantees. In the US, procedural law takes the form of rules and practices that guide federal and state courts in civil and criminal trials.

No it doesn't. You might like to think it does, but it doesn't. See eg: the Military Commissions Act.

 

[domroger]

correction, The US Constitution and its amendments protect the rights of both citizens and non-citizens. While the right to vote is exclusive to citizens, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee due process to all persons within US jurisdiction. This includes non-citizens, even those in the country illegally. Procedural law, which governs the methods and rules of court proceedings, is derived from these due process guarantees. In the US, procedural law takes the form of rules and practices that guide federal and state courts in civil and criminal trials.

Don't confuse him with facts,he lives in his own universe.

 

[whiskeytangofoxtrot]

No it doesn't. You might like to think it does, but it doesn't. See eg: the Military Commissions Act.

The constitution is the document not the MCA.

 

[HisArpy]

The constitution is the document not the MCA.

Ahh, so the 2nd Amendment actually means what is says in shall not be infringed?

Or do "common sense gun control" laws override it?