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

[rightwinger]

Ah, how convenient. The loopy leftists now excuse their criminal illegals by claiming illegal entry into the U.S, is merely “ civil disobedience’’.

Trespassing

 

[Nostra]

Yes they did
That lower courts can’t issue a nationwide judgement

This one applies to ICE in California

This clown will get bitchslapped too, Trollwinger.

 

[Hollie]

Trespassing

Illegal entry.

The respective immigration code sections have been posted.

 

[rightwinger]

Illegal entry.

The respective immigration code sections have been posted.

Paperwork issue that can be easily resolved

 

[BackAgain]

So the illegals are NOT Criminals being deported, as we've repeatedly been told by Trump and MAGAs? You are admitting that the deportees being arrested/captured are not criminals.... because they did not commit a criminal offence by crossing the border outside the legal border crossing....they only committed a civil offense, civil disobedience so to say?

Thank you for admitting the illegals are by far majority, not criminals and the whole casting those being deported as CRIMINALS, has been a ruse, a lie.

Please don’t tell me what I have supposedly “admitted.” You’re wrong. I said and I implied no such thing. You remain wrong.

Of course they’re here illegally if they failed to go through the processes required of them to get in or to remain in our land. And since doing that can come with a penalty under the law, it is possible to criminally prosecute them.

However, a removal proceeding (which we often refer to as a deportation case) isn’t a criminal proceeding

See:

8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)

 

[BackAgain]

The Judge is asking for basic Probable Cause
ICE seems to struggle with the concept

Once again a trite and ignorant lib employs the term “due process” without bothering to ask the necessary question: “to what process is an illegal alien due?” And in a lot of different scenarios, due process isn’t what you think it is.

 

[d0gbreath]

Raped and dead victims means you should happily do your part to help prevent more raped and dead victims.
This shit ain’t complicated.

I do my part by not raping and murdering anyone. My refusing to show my ID has nothing to do with that, at all. Want to see it? Get a warrant.

 

[rightwinger]

Once again a trite and ignorant lib employs the term “due process” without bothering to ask the necessary question: “to what process is an illegal alien due?” And in a lot of different scenarios, due process isn’t what you think it is.

The question from the judge is probable cause to detain.
That applies to illegals, legal visitors and citizens.

You just can’t round people up because of the color of their skin or language and meet basic constitutional protections

 

[BrokeLoser]

I do my part by not raping and murdering anyone. My refusing to show my ID has nothing to do with that, at all. Want to see it? Get a warrant.

That’s so cool…you’re such a defiant badass.

 

[d0gbreath]

That’s so cool…you’re such a defiant badass.

You really have no idea, but thanks anyway.

 

[BrokeLoser]

You really have no idea.

The “idea” is simple for all good decent sane folks….We comply with those busting their asses to help improve our communities, cities, states and nation. We have an EXTREME problem that can only be fixed with extreme measures. I think it is you who has no idea.
You could stop playing ******* games and just say it…”I love illegals here, I think all nations should have tens of millions of unknown unvetted thirdworlders living among citizens.”

 

[d0gbreath]

The “idea” is simple for all good decent sane folks….We comply with those busting their asses to help improve our communities, cities, states and nation. We have an EXTREME problem that can only be fixed with extreme measures. I think it is you who has no idea.
You could stop playing ******* games and just say it…”I love illegals here, I think all nations should have tens of millions of unknown unvetted thirdworlders living among citizens.”

I'm a no borders guy to the bone, so yeah, you can quote me on that.

 

[BackAgain]

The question from the judge is probable cause to detain.
That applies to illegals, legal visitors and citizens.

You just can’t round people up because of the color of their skin or language and meet basic constitutional protections

No. You’re wrong. Again. The question for the immigration “judge” is whether or not the purportedly illegal alien is actually an illegal alien.

Assuming that you are a U.S. citizen, there can be a genuine legal issue about whether your hypothetical arrest was premised on actual probable cause.

But a simple detention (which isn’t the same as an arrest) for purposes of taking an illegal alien to immigration “court” doesn’t demand the same due process “rights.”

 

[BackAgain]

I'm a no borders guy to the bone, so yeah, you can quote me on that.

So what? You’re an idiot.

 

[rightwinger]

Assuming that you are a U.S. citizen, there can be a genuine legal issue about whether your hypothetical arrest was premised on actual probable cause.

And all that judge is asking for is probable cause that does not include skin color, language or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It is a Civil Liberties issue

 

[BackAgain]

And all that judge is asking for is probable cause that does not include skin color, language or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It is a Civil Liberties issue

Is it?

And on what lawful basis is the judge “asking for” the evidence of probable cause for the detention?

Is it statutory?

Is it allegedly a Constitutional requirement for an illegal alien in an administrative removal proceeding?

Is it predicated on how he “feels” that things “ought to be?”

And as I noted yesterday, there is no “right without a remedy nor a remedy without a right.”

So what is the “remedy” for not having whatever level of probable cause might be required? Just as you can suppress evidence in a criminal case for certain law enforcement missteps, but can’t suppress the arrest itself; I say you can’t suppress the detention of an illegal alien.

And that’s the point. The question for an immigration judge isn’t “gee, was the detention of this person based on probable cause?” And it’s not the question for an immigration judge for good reason. It’s because the answer to that doesn’t alter anything, either way. Nor should it.

The sole question before an immigration judge is whether or not the alien is here legally (including having some other legislatively approved bases for being allowed to be here).

 

[WEATHER53]

The question from the judge is probable cause to detain.
That applies to illegals, legal visitors and citizens.

You just can’t round people up because of the color of their skin or language and meet basic constitutional protections

And no one has

 

[WEATHER53]

Probable is Not certainty

 

[ColonelAngus]

Sneaking over the border is a CRIME.

WHY CANT YOU LEFTIES GET THAT?

8 U.S. Code § 1325 - Improper entry by alien

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[iamwhatiseem]

US District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, ordered that DHS must develop guidance for officers to determine “reasonable suspicion” outside of the apparent race or ethnicity of a person, the language they speak or their accent, “presence at a particular location” such as a bus stop or “the type of work one does.”

Seems reasonable
We are not a “show me your papers” state

No
Because this assumes there is no guidance.
There is.
You can't just claim something, with no basis, and then rule as it if is fact.

Even though, I know very well you have no problem with that kind of fascism.