Judge "orders" Trump Administration to stop arresting people in California

You don’t do research and actively avoid things that contradict your narrative.

Such as the whistleblower report.
There are many "whistleblowers" out there, such as the ACLU, who selectively defend civil liberties.

They only took this case because it aligned with their goals, not for any concern for civil liberty. If they were concerned with that, they wouldn't have touched these people with a ten-foot pole.
 
lol....rw said we dont live in a society were we need to show papers......he didnt differentiate either....i just showed him we do have to show papers...
As a condition of driving on our roads, a driver is required to show a license and registration. You are not required to show citizenship and no passengers are required to show ID.
 
lol....rw said we dont live in a society were we need to show papers......he didnt differentiate either....i just showed him we do have to show papers...
Based on Supreme Court precedent, there is no general requirement to carry identification or identify oneself to law enforcement unless there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

Kolender v. Lawson (1983): This case dealt with a California law requiring "loiterers" or "wanderers" to provide "credible and reliable" identification when requested by a peace officer.
 
Now you are advocating GUILT BY ASSOCIATION?
Because illegals surround themselves with similar people, that provides reasonable suspicion, and could lead to arrests of other illegals in their vicinity.

Guilt by association? Sure, if you want to go with that.

Not very familiar with tactics, are you?
 
Based on Supreme Court precedent, there is no general requirement to carry identification or identify oneself to law enforcement unless there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

Kolender v. Lawson (1983): This case dealt with a California law requiring "loiterers" or "wanderers" to provide "credible and reliable" identification when requested by a peace officer.
Then why are people required to show ID in traffic stops? Buying alcohol and spirits? Purchasing firearms? Vehicles?

Sorry, that case doesn't hold up. If an illegal is breaking the law, the cops will ask for their ID. If it's a traffic stop, they need an ID.
 
As a condition of driving on our roads, a driver is required to show a license and registration. You are not required to show citizenship and no passengers are required to show ID.
That’s a terrible attempt at comparison. Driving is a privilege. Illegally crossing the border is not,
 
And what do you call rounding up and traumatizing a legal couple with young children based on no evidence or probable cause ?
What do you call newsom lying about the raid on the pot farm? Then we find out there were child slaves working there? That's the lies you loons are spreading trying to stop the deportation of illegals.
 
Another weird name that Dems keep appointing who have zero loyalty to the rule of law. Seriously, Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong?
What part of the ruling violates the rule of law?

Probable cause is a cornerstone of our legal system
 
As a condition of driving on our roads, a driver is required to show a license and registration. You are not required to show citizenship and no passengers are required to show ID.
you didnt say drivers did you?....you said we dont have to show "papers".....to late for damage control....
 
What do you call newsom lying about the raid on the pot farm? Then we find out there were child slaves working there? That's the lies you loons are spreading trying to stop the deportation of illegals.
Has nothing to do with needing probable cause to detain someone
 
What part of the ruling violates the rule of law?

Probable cause is a cornerstone of our legal system
As is the Constitution. Why did democrats choose to ignore the Constitution regarding immigration law?
 
There are many "whistleblowers" out there, such as the ACLU, who selectively defend civil liberties.

They only took this case because it aligned with their goals, not for any concern for civil liberty. If they were concerned with that, they wouldn't have touched these people with a ten-foot pole.
This post makes very little sense and only serves to ignore and obfuscate the point I made.
 
you didnt say drivers did you?....you said we dont have to show "papers".....to late for damage control....
We don’t.

You still need probable cause to stop a driver and request a license.
A traffic stop for the sole purpose of checking a license is illegal
 
15th post
Then why are people required to show ID in traffic stops? Buying alcohol and spirits? Purchasing firearms? Vehicles?

Sorry, that case doesn't hold up. If an illegal is breaking the law, the cops will ask for their ID. If it's a traffic stop, they need an ID.
Rightwinger already answered that.
 
Back
Top Bottom