- Thread starter
- #61
Well at no president except Trump has to contact his lawyer to determine if he supports the constitution
Mr. President, do you need to uphold the constitution?
- Thread starter Flopper
- Start date
Tommy Tainant
Diamond Member
The constitution is optional. On many points it conflicts with things that trump is trying to do.
Habeas corpus is an antiquated and outdated system of justice that is a block on trump justice. Alogorithms cannot predict the result of a "trial" with "evidence" and "witnesses" so how can the govt plan properly ?
Trump is being bold in grasping this nettle. He now needs to go the whole way. The constitution needs to be rewritten. Possibly by some of the big thinkers in the admin. Can I hear the name Stephen Miller on every mans lips ?
SeaMajor7
Diamond Member
You gaslight junkies need to get a life.
Can we point out saying Dems hate the Constitution is just a RW media bubble creation...
It is protectionism... Claim the opposition is doing something illegal before you are going to do it yourself...
Here we have the President of US saying that Constitution is a optional document to follow...
Have you any other President from both sides of the aisle saying that...
Have you got President disobeying Judges? We have other admins testing law and loosing cases and appealing (that is all very legal).
MAGA is a busted flush on any ethical government... They campaigned on getting rid of the swamp but what they put in is a sewer... They will not admit that Trump Admin level of Corruption is at a level unseen in US government...
Trump is now taking a Plane as a bribe.,..
SeaMajor7
Diamond Member
"Disobeying judges" ???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
You should be more concerned about your country being overtaken by the Muslim hordes invasion of it.
M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
Where did he say this?
Boy, you have ALL the talking points down. Well done!
- Thread starter
- #67
Expidited Removal only applies in very specific cases.Under the law, not every deportation requires a court hearing - in fact, most do not.
Expedited removal, in place for almost 30 years, only requires the decision of an INS/DHS/ICE officer.
No judge, no lawyer, no appeal.
And it meets the constitutional requirement for due process.
See:
Just gonna leave this here.
The left's double standard speaks for itself.
Trump should change policies to match that of the Obama administration, and make it known, at every turn, he's done so.
The Obama administration has prioritized speed over fairness in the removal system, sacrificing individualized due process in the pursuit of record removal numbers.
The numbers are staggering: in 1995, 1,400 immigrants were subject to nonjudicial removals, representing 3 percent of total deportations...
1. A person arrives at the port of entry without property documentation.
2. A persons is caught crossing the boarder illegally. If the individual expresses fear of persecution or torture, they are entitled to undergo a "fear screening" process and may be able to apply for asylum.
3. In the past, the U.S. government had limited its use of expedited removal, but it has been expanded in recent years to include individuals who are further from the border and who have been in the U.S. for a shorter period of time.
Expedited Removal can not legally be used to remove the vast majority undocumented immigrants in the US because they are not near border and they have been in the US for over 2 years.
Or course the way Trump runs ICE, Migrants are detained only long enough to get a signed deportation order.
The constitution is exclusively for US Citizens with one exception, the 5th amendment which applies to every person within the US. This has been upheld by SCOTUS more than once.
Last edited:
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Expedited Removal can not legally be used to remove the vast majority undocumented immigrants in the US because they are not near border and they have been in the US for over 2 years.
Where does the law say that?
- Thread starter
- #69
Just about every president has violated the constitution but none so blatantly and purposefully. His violation of the 5th amendment has become a cornerstone of his administration.
The current process used by the Trump administration for detaining and deporting migrants is not just unconstitutional but deeply flawed and undermines the principles of justice. Migrants are held only long enough to secure a signed deportation order, after which they are swiftly deported, before they have a meaningful opportunity to present their case before a judge. This rapid process effectively strips them of their right to due process.
Requests for asylum, pleas for time extensions to provide supporting documentation, and other standard legal claims are routinely ignored. What’s more troubling is that once deported, these individuals are legally barred from re-entering the country, making it nearly impossible for them to prove that they have a legitimate right to be here. This system is not just a bureaucratic shortcoming; it is a calculated method that weaponizes legal procedures to deny individuals their basic rights.
This process is a mockery of justice. It is a system designed not to ensure fairness but to expedite removals at the expense of human dignity and legal integrity.
The current process used by the Trump administration for detaining and deporting migrants is not just unconstitutional but deeply flawed and undermines the principles of justice. Migrants are held only long enough to secure a signed deportation order, after which they are swiftly deported, before they have a meaningful opportunity to present their case before a judge. This rapid process effectively strips them of their right to due process.
Requests for asylum, pleas for time extensions to provide supporting documentation, and other standard legal claims are routinely ignored. What’s more troubling is that once deported, these individuals are legally barred from re-entering the country, making it nearly impossible for them to prove that they have a legitimate right to be here. This system is not just a bureaucratic shortcoming; it is a calculated method that weaponizes legal procedures to deny individuals their basic rights.
This process is a mockery of justice. It is a system designed not to ensure fairness but to expedite removals at the expense of human dignity and legal integrity.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Migrants are held only long enough to secure a signed deportation order, after which they are swiftly deported, before they have a meaningful opportunity to present their case before a judge.
What kind of judge is supposed to hear the case of these illegal aliens? Why?
This rapid process effectively strips them of their right to due process.
What due process must an illegal alien be given?
Requests for asylum, pleas for time extensions to provide supporting documentation, and other standard legal claims are routinely ignored.
How long have they been here illegally? Did they already miss the deadline to claim asylum?
If they have supporting documentation, why haven't they already used it?
Sorry, you failed to prove your fake claims, sometimes for years or even decades. You routinely ignored our laws.
You can leave now.
What’s more troubling is that once deported, these individuals are legally barred from re-entering the country,
That's what the law says, right? Enter illegally, get caught, you're barred from reentry. These illegal aliens aren't above the law, right?
making it nearly impossible for them to prove that they have a legitimate right to be here.
They had their chance to prove their legitimate right when they first entered illegally and failed to apply for asylum.
Why should they get to break the rules, multiple times and then, after they're caught, get to say, "wait, now I want to use the rules I ignored before"?
This process is a mockery of justice.
So was Biden's wide-open border.
BrokeLoser
Diamond Member
I remember when baby killers said “Roe v. Wade is settled law.”
- Thread starter
- #72
8 CFR § 235.3 - Inadmissible aliens and expedited removal.
M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
Expedited removal accounted for 75% of the deportations during the Obama administration.
Obama deported people regardless if they were criminals or not - why can't Trump?
Obama did not need to put every deportee before a judge - why does Trump?
Obama deported people with nothing but a review by a DHS or ICE agent - why can't Trump?
Obama deported people w/o witnesses, attorneys, or appeals - why can't Trump?
The law has since been changed to "anywhere in the US".
=-
M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
It is entirely possible that the due process specified by law does not entitle them to present a case before a judge (see: expedited removal)
M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
- Thread starter
- #76
You mean Trump's executive orders which supersede federal law and the constitution.
- Thread starter
- #77
Due process is specified by 5th amendment of the constitution. Expedited removal in the law applies when:
- You present yourself a the boarder crossing without proper documentation.
- You are apprehended crossing the border illegally.
- Noncitizens entering the U.S. without authorization who were are apprehended within two weeks of illegally crossing the boarder and within 100 miles of a U.S. land border.
As it stands now anyone who does not show proper documentation when apprehended by ICE can be deported anytime, anywhere, with no legal protections. Same as the Nazis did before they started shotting migrants down in the streets. That will probably be the next Trump executive order.
BrokeLoser
Diamond Member
Like when the Kenyan created his very own personal type of citizenship called DACA?
M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
No. I mean exactly what I said.
Why did you avoid the questions I asked?
M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
Two years.
And for these people, what specific 'due process' is constitutionally necessary before they can be removed?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
ICE snatches denmark born father at his naturalisation hearing he commited no crimes- Started by Mortimer
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
