Trump loses again! Fed Court rules again ICE detainers

[Two Thumbs]

So, there goes Trump's war on sanctuary cities!

Mass. High Court: Local Authorities Can't Detain People Without Charges For ICE

I posted over and over again when he was running for president that his entire agenda was unconstitutional. Sure, This is not the SC, but this decision will be upheld.

so you are glad that possible criminals will go free.


weird.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Detaining and removing people that don't belong in this country makes a fascist police state? Maybe we should quit arresting rapists and child molesters so we are not accused of the same.

As a matter of fact, Ray, we don't arrest "rapists and murderers" without probable cause, because, Ray, and please dwell on this for a few seconds, there is no rapist or murderer until a suspect has been convicted of being a rapist or murderer. Until that happens, he is only a suspect, and the police must have probable cause to arrest him. Now, go dig out your 8th grade Civics book, and read up on it.

So ICE knowing the person is in the country illegally isn't probable cause? First offense is punishable up to 6 months in jail. Just that knowledge is enough to hold them for 48 hours.


.

"Knowing" someone is in the country illegally does not constitute probable cause, and frankly, it amazes me how often I have to explain constitutional rights to the RW. Any judge would ask, "How did you know? What evidence did you have before you detained him?" IF BP can not answer that question to the judge's satisfaction, he will throw the whole case out of court.

Damn man you're losing it. These people are already in custody, their citizenship and immigration status is known and documented, how else would ICE know who to request detainer's on. But hey, feel free to keep trying to excuse the unexcuseable.


.

I will try to keep it simple for you. In America, a man is innocent until proven guilty. If the feds have probable cause that a person in an illegal immigrant, they can present that to a judge, who will hold the suspect until he is tried. If the feds do no have probable cause, then the man will be released, just like any other citizen of the USA.

What part of that don't you understand?

An American citizen can be held by police for 24 hours for questioning before they charge or release them. They can ask a judge for more time if they want to hold you longer before they charge you.

This has nothing to do with constitutional rights, it has to do with trying to stop the Trump agenda. This judge (among others) is a good example why we should never trust Democrats to select judges, and I'm glad they are proving this all the time.

 

[Vandalshandle]

"Knowing" someone is in the country illegally does not constitute probable cause, and frankly, it amazes me how often I have to explain constitutional rights to the RW. Any judge would ask, "How did you know? What evidence did you have before you detained him?" IF BP can not answer that question to the judge's satisfaction, he will throw the whole case out of court.

Damn man you're losing it. These people are already in custody, their citizenship and immigration status is known and documented, how else would ICE know who to request detainer's on. But hey, feel free to keep trying to excuse the unexcuseable.


.

I will try to keep it simple for you. In America, a man is innocent until proven guilty. If the feds have probable cause that a person in an illegal immigrant, they can present that to a judge, who will hold the suspect until he is tried. If the feds do no have probable cause, then the man will be released, just like any other citizen of the USA.

What part of that don't you understand?

What do you not understand about they know who the individual is and they are in the country illegally, the facts are already documented, that in and of itself constitutes probable cause. They have every legal right to request a 48 hour hold to pick them up by federal law, I guarantee SCOTUS will agree.


.

Well, now, I guess that we agree! The court only held that ICE can not hold somebody WITHOUT CHARGES. The situation that you describe clearly amounts to probable cause, and if the feds act quickly, according to law, the charges will be filed and the suspect will be detained. That being the case, what the hell are you bitching about?

I wasn't the one claiming ICE detainers were unconstitutional, what did you think they were doing, placing holds on anyone with a hispanic or uncommon surname?

Edit: BTW they guy in your story has a valid deportation order, signed by a judge.

.

As a matter of fact, ICE was violating the constitution, which is why the federal court told them to stop doing it.

 

[Vandalshandle]

So, there goes Trump's war on sanctuary cities!

Mass. High Court: Local Authorities Can't Detain People Without Charges For ICE

I posted over and over again when he was running for president that his entire agenda was unconstitutional. Sure, This is not the SC, but this decision will be upheld.

so you are glad that possible criminals will go free.


weird.

I am glad that the federal government will have to abide by the Constitution of the USA. Apparantly, you don't think that they should have to.

Weird.

 

[Vandalshandle]

As a matter of fact, Ray, we don't arrest "rapists and murderers" without probable cause, because, Ray, and please dwell on this for a few seconds, there is no rapist or murderer until a suspect has been convicted of being a rapist or murderer. Until that happens, he is only a suspect, and the police must have probable cause to arrest him. Now, go dig out your 8th grade Civics book, and read up on it.

So ICE knowing the person is in the country illegally isn't probable cause? First offense is punishable up to 6 months in jail. Just that knowledge is enough to hold them for 48 hours.


.

"Knowing" someone is in the country illegally does not constitute probable cause, and frankly, it amazes me how often I have to explain constitutional rights to the RW. Any judge would ask, "How did you know? What evidence did you have before you detained him?" IF BP can not answer that question to the judge's satisfaction, he will throw the whole case out of court.

Damn man you're losing it. These people are already in custody, their citizenship and immigration status is known and documented, how else would ICE know who to request detainer's on. But hey, feel free to keep trying to excuse the unexcuseable.


.

I will try to keep it simple for you. In America, a man is innocent until proven guilty. If the feds have probable cause that a person in an illegal immigrant, they can present that to a judge, who will hold the suspect until he is tried. If the feds do no have probable cause, then the man will be released, just like any other citizen of the USA.

What part of that don't you understand?

An American citizen can be held by police for 24 hours for questioning before they charge or release them. They can ask a judge for more time if they want to hold you longer before they charge you.

This has nothing to do with constitutional rights, it has to do with trying to stop the Trump agenda. This judge (among others) is a good example why we should never trust Democrats to select judges, and I'm glad they are proving this all the time.

Well, by golly, you should get to DC right away, present your JD credentials, and demand a seat on the bar!

 

[OKTexas]

Damn man you're losing it. These people are already in custody, their citizenship and immigration status is known and documented, how else would ICE know who to request detainer's on. But hey, feel free to keep trying to excuse the unexcuseable.


.

I will try to keep it simple for you. In America, a man is innocent until proven guilty. If the feds have probable cause that a person in an illegal immigrant, they can present that to a judge, who will hold the suspect until he is tried. If the feds do no have probable cause, then the man will be released, just like any other citizen of the USA.

What part of that don't you understand?

What do you not understand about they know who the individual is and they are in the country illegally, the facts are already documented, that in and of itself constitutes probable cause. They have every legal right to request a 48 hour hold to pick them up by federal law, I guarantee SCOTUS will agree.


.

Well, now, I guess that we agree! The court only held that ICE can not hold somebody WITHOUT CHARGES. The situation that you describe clearly amounts to probable cause, and if the feds act quickly, according to law, the charges will be filed and the suspect will be detained. That being the case, what the hell are you bitching about?

I wasn't the one claiming ICE detainers were unconstitutional, what did you think they were doing, placing holds on anyone with a hispanic or uncommon surname?

Edit: BTW they guy in your story has a valid deportation order, signed by a judge.

.

As a matter of fact, ICE was violating the constitution, which is why the federal court told them to stop doing it.

Did you not read your own link, it was the State of Mass court that said it violated State law. I guess they've never heard of the supremacy clause.


.

 

[Two Thumbs]

So, there goes Trump's war on sanctuary cities!

Mass. High Court: Local Authorities Can't Detain People Without Charges For ICE

I posted over and over again when he was running for president that his entire agenda was unconstitutional. Sure, This is not the SC, but this decision will be upheld.

so you are glad that possible criminals will go free.


weird.

I am glad that the federal government will have to abide by the Constitution of the USA. Apparantly, you don't think that they should have to.

Weird.

we can be detained, you and me, on suspicion of a crime.

but you and I are white, so that makes it ok.