Boasberg’s Judicial Coup Update: Judge Gives President Trump Deadline of Tuesday for Compliance

[Skylar]

Leftard finally figured it out, now he's backtracking.

This is why leftards lost the presidency and both houses of Congress.

Leftards are way too stupid to run the country

Laughing.....you're clearly confused. They can absolutely be deported. With judicial review and due process.

The judge in question already acknowledged that the Trump administration has full authority to deport them under the INA. Which requires both due process and judicial review.

What the judge has rejected is Trump's claim of power under the Alien and Sedition Act to deport without judicial review or due process using wartime authority outside of war. The judge instead found that each of the individual are due a hearing to determine if the Alien and Sedition act even applies to them.

And as we've long established, the federal judiciary has the authority to interpret the law. You do not.

 

[Skylar]

This ^^^ is called LEGISLATING FROM THE BENCH.

Says you, citing yourself as a legal authority.

And you're nobody. The federal judiciary has made this ruling:

"The President’s unprecedented use of the Act outside of the typical wartime context — and Plaintiffs’ various
challenges to such use — implicates a host of complicated legal issues, including fundamental
and sensitive questions about the often-circumscribed extent of judicial power in matters of
foreign policy and national security. Such concerns arise principally in connection with
Plaintiffs’ contention that any action taken pursuant to the Proclamation is unlawful because,
despite the President’s determination otherwise, Tren de Aragua is not a “foreign nation or
government,” and its actions, however heinous, do not amount to an “invasion” or a “predatory
incursion.”

The Court need not resolve the thorny question of whether the judiciary has the authority
to assess this claim in the first place. That is because Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on another
equally fundamental theory: before they may be deported, they are entitled to individualized
hearings to determine whether the Act applies to them at all."

If Trump disagrees with the ruling, he can appeal. Which he is.

 

[scruffy]

Says you, citing yourself as a legal authority.

And you're nobody.

If Trump disagrees with the ruling, he can appeal. Which he is.

No, he's not.

He told Boasberg to **** off.

Which is exactly what I recommended.

 

[Skylar]

This ^^^ is called LEGISLATING FROM THE BENCH.

There is no such provision in the law.

In fact, the law says EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE

Also, you're citing the wrong law.

You're citing Title 8. The judge doesn't dispute that Trump has the authority to deport under Title 8. And in fact explicitly acknowledges that the Trump admin has the authority to do exactly that on page 2 of his 37 page ruling.

You're literally raging about 'legislating from the bench', while not actually understanding what is being argued by the Trump administration.

Trump is claiming authority not under Title 8, but under TItle 50. Here's the law that the Trump administration is citing: 50 U.S. Code § 21 - Restraint, regulation, and removal

And that's where Trump has run into problems.

 

[scruffy]

Also, you're citing the wrong law.

Trump invoked 50 U.S.C. § 21. You're citing Title 8.

Here's the law that the Trump administration is citing: 50 U.S. Code § 21 - Restraint, regulation, and removal

Irrelevant.

They can cite whatever they want.

I'm referencing THE ACTUAL LAW.

You know, the one that's written down. In English. So we can all understand it.

 

[Skylar]

Irrelevant.

They can cite whatever they want.

I'm referencing THE ACTUAL LAW.

You know, the one that's written down. In English. So we can all understand it.

Nope. You simlly don't know how the law works.

You're citing Title 8. The judge doesn't dispute that Trump has the authority to deport under Title 8. And in fact explicitly acknowledges that the Trump admin has the authority to do exactly that on page 2 of his 37 page ruling.

You're literally raging about 'legislating from the bench', while not actually understanding what is being argued by the Trump administration.

Trump is claiming authority not under Title 8, but under TItle 50. Here's the law that the Trump administration is citing: 50 U.S. Code § 21 - Restraint, regulation, and removal

Trump could easily deport them under Title 8. And the judge has explicitly stated that his ruling does not prevent the deportation under INA in Title 8.

But Trump refuses to deport under Title 8, instead claiming authority under Title 50. Which doesn't include ANY provision against judicial review that you're referring to.

You're citing the wrong law. You don't know what you're talking about.

This is why NO ONE uses you as a legal authority, Scruffy.

 

[scruffy]

Nope. You simlly don't know how the law works.

You're citing Title 8. The judge doesn't dispute that Trump has the authority to deport under Title 8. And in fact explicitly acknowledges that the Trump admin has the authority to do exactly that on page 2 of his 37 page ruling.

You're literally raging about 'legislating from the bench', while not actually understanding what is being argued by the Trump administration.

Trump is claiming authority not under Title 8, but under TItle 50. Here's the law that the Trump administration is citing: 50 U.S. Code § 21 - Restraint, regulation, and removal

Trump could easily deport them under Title 8. And the judge has explicitly stated that his ruling does not prevent the deportation under INA in Title 8.

But Trump refuses to deport under Title 8, instead claiming authority under Title 50.

Shit for brains, THE JUDGE ORDERED THE PLANE TO TURN AROUND.

Damn you morons are stupid.

You're citing the wrong law. You don't know what you're talking about.

"The wrong law". lmao

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Again, you don't know what you're talking about.

“The Order did not prevent Defendants from removing anyone — to include members of the class — through other immigration authorities such as the [Immigration and Nationality Act]. Indeed, as previously mentioned, those affiliated with Tren de Aragua were all already deportable under that statute as members of an [Foreign Terrorist Organization],

https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...rg-alien-enemies-act-deportation-venezuelans/
Which is exactly what I've said.

"nope" Thats "exactly" what you said? please repost it.

Nothing prevents Trump from using due process and judicial review to deport these folks.

Not the point of my post, but until then white liberals are claiming they must remain in the country.

So I ask again, who says that they can't be deported?

You

So far its you citing your imagination on a topic you know nothing about.

"nope" so lets see who that is true of...

Try again.

will do...[I think you forgot your "thousands of times a day" mantra]

hmmm...leave it to white liberals to get it exactly wrong, they are now arguing that it is illegal for these folks to leave the country.

as you can see my post has nothing that you claim in it, "deportation" appears nowhere in my post, you imagined it, and then argued it.

 

[Skylar]

Shit for brains, THE JUDGE ORDERED THE PLANE TO TURN AROUND.

Damn you morons are stupid.

Again, friend....you're citing the wrong law. You've been ignorantly citing INA provisions under Title 8, which Trump refuses to use in this case. Trump instead has claimed authority under Title 50. Which has no such provisions.

You simply don't know what you're talking about. The judge does. On Page TWO, he acknowledges that his order doesn't prevent deportation under Title 8.

"Neither Order required the Government to release a single individual from its
custody. Neither Order prevented the Government from apprehending anyone pursuant to the
just-published Proclamation. And neither Order prevented the Government from deporting
anyone — including Plaintiffs — through authorities other than the Proclamation, such as the
INA. Indeed, as the President last month designated Tren de Aragua a Foreign Terrorist
Organization, members of the gang are already inadmissible to (and thus deportable from) the
United States under the INA. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)."

But Trump isn't using Title 8. Making all of your citations meaningless. This is why NO ONE cites you as a legal authority.

"They justifiably feared that, in a matter of hours, they might be removed from the country pursuant not
to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, but instead the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a law
last invoked in the wake of Pearl Harbor as the nation was preparing for a world war. That Act
authorizes the President to summarily remove “natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects” of a
“hostile nation or government” when there is “declared war” against it or when it has
“perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States” an “invasion or
predatory incursion.” 50 U.S.C. § 21.

These individuals weren't expelled under INA in Title 8. They were expelled under 50 U.S.C. § 21...which is where he runs into problems. As 50 U.S.C. § 21 provides no provisions for the stripping of judicial review.

All the raging about 'legislating from the bench', all the MAGA whining about 'corruption' and 'coups' and other silly nonsense....

....was just you and your ilk not knowing what the **** they're talking about.

 

[scruffy]

Again, friend....you're citing the wrong law. You've been ignorantly citing INA provisions under Title 8, which Trump refuses to use in this case. Trump instead has claimed authority under Title 50. Which has no such provisions.

You simply don't know what you're talking about. The judge does. On Page TWO, he acknowledges that his order doesn't prevent deportation under Title 8.

"Neither Order required the Government to release a single individual from its
custody. Neither Order prevented the Government from apprehending anyone pursuant to the
just-published Proclamation. And neither Order prevented the Government from deporting
anyone — including Plaintiffs — through authorities other than the Proclamation, such as the
INA. Indeed, as the President last month designated Tren de Aragua a Foreign Terrorist
Organization, members of the gang are already inadmissible to (and thus deportable from) the
United States under the INA. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)."

But Trump isn't using Title 8. Making all of your citations meaningless. This is why NO ONE cites you as a legal authority.

"They justifiably feared that, in a matter of hours, they might be removed from the country pursuant not
to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, but instead the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a law
last invoked in the wake of Pearl Harbor as the nation was preparing for a world war. That Act
authorizes the President to summarily remove “natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects” of a
“hostile nation or government” when there is “declared war” against it or when it has
“perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States” an “invasion or
predatory incursion.” 50 U.S.C. § 21.

These individuals weren't expelled under INA in Title 8. They were expelled under 50 U.S.C. § 21...which is where he runs into problems. As 50 U.S.C. § 21 provides no provisions for the stripping of judicial review.

WHO CARES what law they were expelled under?

The President's authorities come from 400,000 different laws. Not even the judge can keep them all straight.

All the raging about 'legislating from the bench', all the MAGA whining about 'corruption' and 'coups' and other silly nonsense....

....was just you and your ilk not knowing what the **** they're talking about.

We're talking about presidential authority.

You know, the Commander in Chief. The guy in charge.

Does he have the authority, yes or no?

 

[Skylar]

"nope" Thats "exactly" what you said? please repost it.

Not the point of my post, but until then white liberals are claiming they must remain in the country.

You

"nope" so lets see who that is true of...


will do...[I think you forgot your "thousands of times a day" mantra]

as you can see my post has nothing that you claim in it, "deportation" appears nowhere in my post, you imagined it, and then argued it.

So you've never cited deportation? Oh, I believe you, buddy. But this Frankenstein guy, he says you're liar.

You explicitly asked, 'was the deportation legal'. But tell us again how you never cited deportation.


The judge has never said that these individuals can't be deported. Under Title 8 of the INA, they absolutely can be, which the judge acknowleges on page 2 of his ruling. What is in dispute is if they can be deported under Title 50's Alien and Sedition Act....without judicial review and due process.

And the judge says that they can't.

 

[scruffy]

So you've never cited deportation? Oh, I believe you, buddy. But this Frankenstein guy, he says you're liar.

View attachment 1093605

You explicitly asked, 'was the deportation legal'. But tell us again how you never cited deportation.


The judge has never said that these individuals can't be deported. Under Title 8 of the INA, they absolutely can be, which the judge acknowleges on page 2 of his ruling. What is in dispute is if they can be deported under Title 50's Alien and Sedition Act....without judicial review and due process.

And the judge says that they can't.

******* idiotic leftard lawfare.

This is the kind of stupid shit that cost you the election.

And you haven't learned a goddamn thing

 

[Skylar]

WHO CARES what law they were expelled under?

The Trump administration. They've refused to deport under Title 8....which they have the full authority to do. And instead are attempting to expand their power under Title 50. You've never read the ruling you're raging against. You have no clue what you're talking about.

Here it is again. The judge acknowledges that Trump can deport under Title 8. You know, the part you ignorantly kept citing as having some relevance to this case, because you didn't know what the **** you were talking about?

"Neither Order required the Government to release a single individual from its
custody. Neither Order prevented the Government from apprehending anyone pursuant to the
just-published Proclamation. And neither Order prevented the Government from deporting
anyone — including Plaintiffs — through authorities other than the Proclamation, such as the
INA. Indeed, as the President last month designated Tren de Aragua a Foreign Terrorist
Organization, members of the gang are already inadmissible to (and thus deportable from) the
United States under the INA. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)."

But Trump isn't using Title 8. Making all of your citations meaningless. Trump is trying to expand his power by deporting under Title 50's Alien and Sedition Act.

"They justifiably feared that, in a matter of hours, they might be removed from the country pursuant not
to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, but instead the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a law
last invoked in the wake of Pearl Harbor as the nation was preparing for a world war. That Act
authorizes the President to summarily remove “natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects” of a
“hostile nation or government” when there is “declared war” against it or when it has
“perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States” an “invasion or
predatory incursion.” 50 U.S.C. § 21.

Which you either knew or should have known. This is why NO ONE cites you as a legal authority.

The President's authorities come from 400,000 different laws. Not even the judge can keep them all straight

We're talking about presidential authority.

Under Title 50. Not under Title 8. You don't know what you're talking about. You've never read the ruling.

And your refusal to educate yourself on the actual legal principles involved doesn't have the slightest relevance to any legal outcome.

 

[Skylar]

******* idiotic leftard lawfare.

This is the kind of stupid shit that cost you the election.

And you haven't learned a goddamn thing

Laughing....you're just cycling through MAGA pseudo-legal gibberish buzzwords.

There's no 'lawfare'. Trump can deport under Title 8. No one disputes that. Making your citations of Title 8 a demonstration of your own useless ignorance.

Trump is trying to expand his power under Title 50, the Alien and Sedition Act. Who cares? The Trump administration. As they are pushing Title 50 as their legal justification. And the individuals in question absolutely get a hearing on whether or not Title 50 applies to them.

Emojis, hysterics, and MAGA buzzwords are a poor replacement for actually reading the ruling.

Which you refuse to do.

 

[scruffy]

The Trump administration. They've refused to deport under Title 8....which they have the full authority to do. And instead are attempting to expand their power under Title 50. You've never read the ruling you're raging against. You have no clue what you're talking about.

Here it is again. The judge acknowledges that Trump can deport under Title 8. You know, the part you ignorantly kept citing as having some relevance to this case, because you didn't know what the **** you were talking about?

"Neither Order required the Government to release a single individual from its
custody. Neither Order prevented the Government from apprehending anyone pursuant to the
just-published Proclamation. And neither Order prevented the Government from deporting
anyone — including Plaintiffs — through authorities other than the Proclamation, such as the
INA. Indeed, as the President last month designated Tren de Aragua a Foreign Terrorist
Organization, members of the gang are already inadmissible to (and thus deportable from) the
United States under the INA. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)."

But Trump isn't using Title 8. Making all of your citations meaningless. Trump is trying to expand his power by deporting under Title 50's Alien and Sedition Act.

"They justifiably feared that, in a matter of hours, they might be removed from the country pursuant not
to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, but instead the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a law
last invoked in the wake of Pearl Harbor as the nation was preparing for a world war. That Act
authorizes the President to summarily remove “natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects” of a
“hostile nation or government” when there is “declared war” against it or when it has
“perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States” an “invasion or
predatory incursion.” 50 U.S.C. § 21.

Which you either knew or should have known. This is why NO ONE cites you as a legal authority.



Under Title 50. Not under Title 8. You don't know what you're talking about. You've never read the ruling.

And your refusal to educate yourself on the actual legal principles involved doesn't have the slightest relevance to any legal outcome.

Answer the question.

Does the President have the authority, yes or no?

If the answer is yes (which it is), then WHY DID THIS SHIT FOR BRAINS JUDGE ORDER THE PLANE TO TURN AROUND?

Why didn't he just tell the lawyer, "hey, you're using the wrong law"?

I'll tell you why. Because this jackass wanted to raise a fuss in the media.

This clown should be impeached for being an embarrassment to the bench.

 

[Skylar]

Answer the question.

Does the President have the authority, yes or no?

Does Trump have the authority to do what? Deport under Title 50 without a judicial hearing on whether or not Title 50 applies to an individual?

The judiciary has said no. These individuals are due an opportunity to dispute the application of Title 50 and whether or not they should fall under it at a court hearing when the law is applied in an unprecedented manner outside of wartime.

And Trump is trying to expand his power by pushing Title 50 -NOT TITLE 8- as his legal basis for his authority to deport without judicial review.

Once again, your inane pseudo-legal babble about 'lawfare', and 'legislating from the bench' were just you not knowing what the **** you were talking about.......ignorantly citing the wrong law, INA in Title 8. When Trump was citing the Alien and Sedition Act in Title 50.

This is why NO ONE cites you as a legal authority, Scruffy. You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[scruffy]

Does Trump have the authority to do what? Deport under Title 50 without a judicial hearing on whether or not Title 50 applies to an individual?

The judiciary has said no. These individuals are due an opportunity to dispute the application of Title 50 and whether or not they should fall under it at a court hearing.

And Trump is trying to expand his power by pushing Title 50 -NOT TITLE 8- as his legal basis for his authority to deport without judicial review.

Once again, your inane pseudo-legal babble about 'lawfare', and 'legislating from the bench' were just you not knowing what the **** you were talking about.......ignorantly citing the wrong law, INA in Title 8. When Trump was citing the Alien and Sedition Act in Title 50.

This is why NO ONE cites you as a legal authority, Scruffy. You don't know what you're talking about.

Now you're running away from the question.

Figures. First backtrack, then run away. Typical jackass leftard.

You know damn well I'm right, but your leftard sensibilities won't let you admit it.

This is why you got booted out of office. It's called TDS.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

So you've never cited deportation?

"nope" that was you

Oh, I believe you, buddy.

Sure, what is there not to believe?

But this Frankenstein guy, he says you're liar.

more imagination...there is no "frankenstein" guy calling me a liar

You explicitly asked, 'was the deportation legal'.

I was questioning your citing of it

But tell us again how you never cited deportation.

GLADLY...But Why do you keep using the word "never", [it never appeared in my post though] this was your imagination as my VpostV proves [time and time again]

hmmm...leave it to white liberals to get it exactly wrong, they are now arguing that it is illegal for these folks to leave the country...

Not that it will matter but ^there^ it is, proof

The judge has never said that these individuals can't be deported. Under Title 8 of the INA, they absolutely can be, which the judge acknowleges on page 2 of his ruling. What is in dispute is if they can be deported under Title 50's Alien and Sedition Act....without judicial review and due process.

And the judge says that they can't.

TRANSLATION: "the judge says these folks must remain in the country"

 

[Skylar]

Now you're running away from the question.

Figures. First backtrack, then run away. Typical jackass leftard.

You know damn well I'm right, but your leftard sensibilities won't let you admit it.

This is why you got booted out of office. It's called TDS.

I'm addressing the ACTUAL legal issues of U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg's ruling. Not your ignorant dipshit nonsense. Not your meaningless pseudo-legal gibberish. Not your panty shitting hysterics about 'lawfare' or 'legislating from the bench'. But the actual legal issue that Judge James Boasberg's ruling addresses.

The president's power under USC 50.

No one is contesting that Trump can deport under Title 8. The judge already acknowledges it in page 2 of the ruling you STILL refuse to read.

"Neither Order required the Government to release a single individual from its
custody. Neither Order prevented the Government from apprehending anyone pursuant to the
just-published Proclamation. And neither Order prevented the Government from deporting
anyone — including Plaintiffs — through authorities other than the Proclamation, such as the
INA. Indeed, as the President last month designated Tren de Aragua a Foreign Terrorist
Organization, members of the gang are already inadmissible to (and thus deportable from) the
United States under the INA. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)."

Making every last one of your citations of Title 8 a demonstration that you had never read the ruling, had no idea what you were talking about, and were blindly ignorant of even a basic understanding of the legal principles involved. Instead, Trump is invoking Title 50....which is where he runs into problems.

"They justifiably feared that, in a matter of hours, they might be removed from the country pursuant not
to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, but instead the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a law
last invoked in the wake of Pearl Harbor as the nation was preparing for a world war. That Act
authorizes the President to summarily remove “natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects” of a
“hostile nation or government” when there is “declared war” against it or when it has
“perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States” an “invasion or
predatory incursion.” 50 U.S.C. § 21.

This is the passage, which appears on the FIRST paragraph of page ONE of the ruling, that if you'd bothered to read, you would realize that your panty shitting hysterics were just more meaningless MAGA idiocy.

"....they might be removed from the country pursuant not to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, but instead the Alien Enemies Act of 1798...."

This is what Trump is raging against: opposition to his authority under USC 50. He could deport anyone like them tomorrow under USC 8. But this is a power grab. And Trump, like his toadies, are furious that Trump is subject to judicial review on his application of Title 50.

Again, read the ruling next time. It will save you from so much embarrassment.

 

[scruffy]

TRANSLATION: "the judge says these folks must remain in the country"

Yep. And that's the bottom line, ain't it.

These leftards would sell their own mothers for a nickel's worth of publicity.