Alito issues scathing dissent on ACLU decision. (Poll)

[WEATHER53]

?

Let me explain to the short bus
In the late 1700’s a new nation was formed with a written condition entitled Constitution of United States of America.
There was zero discussion of unlawful entrants and that is still the case

What is your next “question”

 

[kyzr]

They followed the law
Trump is not
That is why the courts blocked him

The USSC did NOT rule on the AEA yet, correct?
I think they just stopped the planes to El Salvador until they get the AEA litigation from the lower courts??

 

[kyzr]

Let me explain to the short bus
In the late 1700’s a new nation was formed with a written condition entitled Constitution of United States of America.
There was zero discussion of unlawful entrants and that is still the case
What is your next “question”

So explain the legality of the Alien Enemies Act oh wise one. How will the USSC rule on it regarding alien criminals?

 

[rightwinger]

The USSC did NOT rule on the AEA yet, correct?
I think they just stopped the planes to El Salvador until they get the AEA litigation from the lower courts??

They saw the urgency in pausing deportations because Trump was shipping as many as he can, as fast as he can until told otherwise

Trump has also made it clear he does not care about a persons individual case and will make no effort to fix mistakes

 

[kyzr]

They saw the urgency in pausing deportations because Trump was shipping as many as he can, as fast as he can until told otherwise
Trump has also made it clear he does not care about a persons individual case and will make no effort to fix mistakes

Worst case, the illegals headed to El Salvador get expedited Hearings. meh.

 

[citygator]

No government lawyer argued anything before the USSC, that is one of the problems.
The USSC needs to make a decision on the AEA before stopping the Executive from using his legal authority.
The AEA is current LAW.

No. They issue injunctions all the time. Where have you been?

 

[rightwinger]

Worst case, the illegals headed to El Salvador get expedited Hearings. meh.

It would be a start

Why won’t Trump just do it?

 

[citygator]

WTF does your post try to say? My post said drug cartels kill 100,000 Americans a year.

Products - Data Briefs - Number 522 - December 2024

Published: 12/19/2024

www.cdc.gov

In 2023, 105,007 drug overdose deaths occurred, resulting in an age-adjusted rate of 31.3 deaths per 100,000 standard population

Give me a break. Then say overdoses. It’s called English for a reason. Words mean something.

 

[WEATHER53]

So explain the legality of the Alien Enemies Act oh wise one. How will the USSC rule on it regarding alien criminals?

Deflection from the Constitution noted and ignored oh dumb one

 

[WEATHER53]

They saw the urgency in pausing deportations because Trump was shipping as many as he can, as fast as he can until told otherwise

Trump has also made it clear he does not care about a persons individual case and will make no effort to fix mistakes

He is correct. People illegally here are not sympathetic and won’t be bestowed any Constitutional benefits.

 

[kyzr]

It would be a start
Why won’t Trump just do it?

The way the AEA reads, literally, is that for "...predatory incursions" such as for drug cartels' drug gangs killing 100,000 Americans a year, no judicial review is required.
So assuming that we get gang members, who pays for their lawyers? The drug cartels? Is there discovery or just a quick hearing showing a judge the evidence?
We have hundreds of thousands of criminals in the US we need quick but legal ways of getting them out.

 

[kyzr]

Deflection from the Constitution noted and ignored oh dumb one

Here is what you posted:
In the late 1700’s a new nation was formed with a written condition entitled Constitution of United States of America. There was zero discussion of unlawful entrants and that is still the case

So handling "illegal aliens" is not covered by the Constitution. OK. No argument.
They covered them in 1798 with the Alien Enemies Act.
Which is being discussed in this thread, do try to keep up.

Answering a question by saying "its not in the Constitution" doesn't even get you partial credit.

 

[WEATHER53]

Here is what you posted:
In the late 1700’s a new nation was formed with a written condition entitled Constitution of United States of America. There was zero discussion of unlawful entrants and that is still the case

So handling "illegal aliens" is not covered by the Constitution. OK. No argument.
They covered them in 1798 with the Alien Enemies Act.
Which is being discussed in this thread, do try to keep up.

Answering a question by saying "its not in the Constitution" doesn't even get you partial credit.

I think we are on same with it all but it got mudfked
To me it is vitally important that the Constitution of USA does not identify persons of foreign lands as being included.

 

[rightwinger]

He is correct. People illegally here are not sympathetic and won’t be bestowed any Constitutional benefits.

The most heinous criminal among us is entitled to Constitutional benefits

 

[WEATHER53]

The most heinous criminal among us is entitled to Constitutional benefits

Just click those heels and pretend someone who parachutes into the USA instantly is bestowed Constitutional rights.

 

[WEATHER53]

The most heinous criminal among us is entitled to Constitutional benefits

When a citizen

 

[rightwinger]

When a citizen

Read the freaking Constitution

 

[kyzr]

I think we are on same with it all but it got mudfked
To me it is vitally important that the Constitution of USA does not identify persons of foreign lands as being included.

Ok, it would be great if the USSC interpreted the word "Persons" to mean "Citizens". But the chikin-shits won't.
FNC just posited that they used the word persons to include female citizens, not foreigners.

 

[WEATHER53]

The persons they were dealing with and working for were the persons here . There was no concept of people being here illegally having left a foreign land. Legal immigrants were granted Constitutional benefits . There is no addressing of, nor even concepts about, Nigerians, Mexicans , Scandinavians, etc

 

[WEATHER53]

Read the freaking Constitution

Persons of the United States. Not unknown people coming from unknown places then or centuries later. The topic you feel is addressed did not even exist at the time of the writing