Pentagon authorizes military lawyers to serve as temporary immigration judges

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I do not care if they are kicked out, and if they are here illegally, they should be. If under asylum, attending hearings to present their case for asylum, they should be heard in a normal court. I am all in favor of hiring civilian judges to hear civilian affairs hearings, simply not in favor of Military JAG corps being used over civilian affairs. Bad precedent.

Why should a "normal court" hear immigration issues? There are very specific laws involved that military lawyers could review in short order.

Your TDS is flaring again! Orange Man Bad on everything!

 

[White 6]

Which isn’t what happened.

And illegal aliens are our civilians anyway.

Besides which, the Immigration Court isn’t a real court. It’s not an Article III Court. It is an arm of the Executive Branch. And military lawyers are … wait for it … lawyers.

In as much as all Department of Justice are under Executive branch, true, but Military Lawyers of the JAG Corps should only be over military matters and military law, which is not a good thing to mince together with civilian courts and justice.
Hire some lawyer from the civilian side of the population, not those under orders to perform to task, under military directive and reassignment.

Joe's 2nd biggest f*ckup (behind opening the doors inviting all to come, was not investing the political capital to set up and beef up the immigration courts, to levels that could deal with it. But, use of the military is not the way. It is just the way Trump want to use the military, this time, similar to wanting to use the military to fight crime in crime ridden cities of civilian population, similar to using the military in cities to affect and conduct immigration raids. Before long, we will all be under the thumb of Trump's military, at his command.

 

[irosie91]

Which isn’t what happened.

And illegal aliens are our civilians anyway.

Besides which, the Immigration Court isn’t a real court. It’s not an Article III Court. It is an arm of the Executive Branch. And military lawyers are … wait for it … lawyers.

the lawyers in the military are real lawyers ----ie with degrees in law. The issue of an immigrant
looking to make a claim is not ROCKET SCIENCE----and guess what ---something I know---the
lawyers in the military are probably more UP FRONT than are civilian lawyers---I believe that they
will do an excellent job------and much less expensive and LESS POLITICS

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

In as much as all Department of Justice are under Executive branch, true, but Military Lawyers of the JAG Corps should only be over military matters and military law, which is not a good thing to mince together with civilian courts and justice.
Hire some lawyer from the civilian side of the population, not those under orders to perform to task, under military directive and reassignment.

Joe's 2nd biggest f*ckup (behind opening the doors inviting all to come, was not investing the political capital to set up and beef up the immigration courts, to levels that could deal with it. But, use of the military is not the way. It is just the way Trump want to use the military, this time, similar to wanting to use the military to fight crime in crime ridden cities of civilian population, similar to using the military in cities to affect and conduct immigration raids. Before long, we will all be under the thumb of Trump's military, at his command.

I had to file a civil suit when I was in the Navy against my landlord. Guess who represented me? A JAG Corps officer two months into being in the Reserves. How could he do that if he didn't know civilian law?

I won by the way.

I swear your military experience must have been clouded by a TBI or something for you to be so off-the-******* wall ignorant! Maybe it's the TDS!

 

[White 6]

I had to file a civil suit when I was in the Navy against my landlord. Guess who represented me? A JAG Corps officer two months into being in the Reserves. How could he do that if he didn't know civilian law?

I won by the way.

I swear your military experience must have been clouded by a TBI or something for you to be so off-the-******* wall ignorant! Maybe it's the TDS!

You were entitled to a military lawyer. Were you required to have a military lawyer. Was the hearing held, at Captain's Mast or other military court? No. It simply was not and indeed, should not have been. What you are saying has absolutely no bearing on civil justice procedures. It does not matter, that he had to pass the Bar and be familiar with civil law. That is not the point. He should not be pulled and reassigned while in uniform as judge over civilian affairs.

 

[BackAgain]

In as much as all Department of Justice are under Executive branch, true, but Military Lawyers of the JAG Corps should only be over military matters and military law,

Nope. There isn’t a special school just to get a Lawyer’s diploma for military law. There is law school and passing a bar exam that makes them lawyers. And then they can practice for a time as lawyers for the military.

And they won’t be using military law to preside over immigration matters. They will be using the laws spelled out in our Immigration laws.

which is not a good thing to mince together with civilian courts and justice.
Hire some lawyer from the civilian side of the population, not those under orders to perform to task, under military directive and reassignment.

I partially agree. Let’s pass a law which allows for the requisite spending. We will also need more Federal Immigrarion lawyers. And we may need additional detention facilities to hold the folks getting detained pending their removal proceedings.

Joe's 2nd biggest f*ckup (behind opening the doors inviting all to come, was not investing the political capital to set up and beef up the immigration courts, to levels that could deal with it. But, use of the military is not the way.

Joe did **** up like that. But there is no real problem with using lawyers from any branch’s JAG Corp.

It is just the way Trump want to use the military, this time, similar to wanting to use the military to fight crime in crime ridden cities of civilian population, similar to using the military in cities to affect and conduct immigration raids. Before long, we will all be under the thumb of Trump's military, at his command.

No evidence supports your speculation even when you state it as a fact. He has available a ready supply of lawyers who happen to be in the military. That’s a very different matter and not one which is of any reasonable concern.

 

[Rawley]

Not enough judges?

Problem solved.

Pentagon authorizes up to 600 military lawyers to serve as temporary immigration judges

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has approved sending up to 600 military lawyers to the Justice Department to serve as temporary immigration judges, according to a memo reviewed by The Associated Press.

apnews.com

Excellent idea

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You were entitled to a military lawyer. Were you required to have a military lawyer. Was the hearing held, at Captain's Mast or other military court? No. It simply was not and indeed, should not have been. What you are saying has absolutely no bearing on civil justice procedures. It does not matter, that he had to pass the Bar and be familiar with civil law. That is not the point. He should not be pulled and reassigned while in uniform as judge over civilian affairs.

What makes you think any of that is going to happen? They will probably be working in civilian clothes, and the illegals won't know a bit of difference. The law is what matters. It is not a civil affair. It's an immigration court.

I do not understand why most people do not understand that immigration is not a civil issue.

 

[Rawley]

Can't hire lawyer from the civilian side, so lets set up military tribunals over civilian affairs? Bad move.

Why?

 

[White 6]

Nope. There isn’t a special school just to get a Lawyer’s diploma for military law. There is law school and passing a bar exam that makes them lawywrs. And then they can practice for a time as lawyers for the military.

And they won’t be using military law to preside over immigration matters. They will be using the laws spelled out in our Immigration laws.

I partially agree. Let’s pass a law which allows for the requisite spending. We will also need more Federal Immigrarion lawyers. And we may need additional detention facilities to hold the folks getting detained pending their removal proceedings.


Joe did **** up like that. But there is no real problem with using lawyers from any branch’s JAG Corp.

No evidence supports your speculation even when you state it as a fact. He has available a ready supply of lawyers who happen to be in the military. That’s a very different matter and not one which is of any reasonable concern.

Totally agree.

Still, that does not negate the standard hiring procedures of the Federal Government, nor does in make it right to re-assign JAG Officers, under military orders, military pay to sit above civilian affairs. Bad precedent.

 

[Concerned American]

Can't hire lawyer from the civilian side, so lets set up military tribunals over civilian affairs? Bad move.

An unbridled foreign invasion is not a civilian affair and the resulting need for deportation tribunals is not either.

 

[White 6]

An unbridled foreign invasion is not a civilian affair and the resulting need for deportation tribunals is not either.

If your were referring to a military invasion, I would agree. But, in this case we are talking about a half-ass invitation from a poor policy of that past president. That is not a military invasion, just shitty policy, just as the answer to it, appears to be more shitty policy, but shitty for a different reason. Poorly thought out short term solutions, often turn into long term precedent, and not the good kind.

 

[BackAgain]

View attachment 1157664
Totally agree.

Still, that does not negate the standard hiring procedures of the Federal Government, nor does in make it right to re-assign JAG Officers, under military orders, military pay to sit above civilian affairs. Bad precedent.

I don’t see why. Somebody gets to preside and to decide. What actual difference does it make which attorney does it? And in what way is it a bad precedent?

 

[White 6]

I don’t see why. Somebody gets to preside and to decide. What actual difference does it make which attorney does it? And in what way is it a bad precedent?

I've been both civilian and military, and understand the position of an officer, even an officer on assignment on detached duty. When military, be military. When actually over decisions of civil affairs (not just filling a Division level civil affairs officer (who is only over the military side of civil affairs), be civilian, never the twain to meet under orders. There are gobs of lawyers out there. We are cranking them out like sausage. Post and fund the placement, fill the slots. Let civilian be civilian and military be military and not an Officer caught in between both, or a civilian with a civil matter, caught up in somebody's half baked military tribunal system wannabe.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Pretty simple really, if you're in this nation illegally you have to go.

 

[1srelluc]

Damn lagging server....double post....Feed the hamsters for goodness sake.

 

[1srelluc]

Damn, that's some real out of the box thinking.....Remember when Biden said his hands were tied by congress as far as shutting down the border?

Same thing here....The dems thought the courts would be the bottleneck they needed till they got into power again.

Not so much now it seems.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

View attachment 1157664
Totally agree.

Still, that does not negate the standard hiring procedures of the Federal Government, nor does in make it right to re-assign JAG Officers, under military orders, military pay to sit above civilian affairs. Bad precedent.

For it to be civil affairs, wouldn't it involve citizens and not be an immigration issue? You seem to have the same problem all of federal judges have in staying in their lane!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Damn lagging server....double post....Feed the hamsters for goodness sake.

Did it to me too!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I've been both civilian and military, and understand the position of an officer, even an officer on assignment on detached duty. When military, be military. When actually over decisions of civil affairs (not just filling a Division level civil affairs officer (who is only over the military side of civil affairs), be civilian, never the twain to meet under orders. There are gobs of lawyers out there. We are cranking them out like sausage. Post and fund the placement, fill the slots. Let civilian be civilian and military be military and not an Officer caught in between both, or a civilian with a civil matter, caught up in somebody's half baked military tribunal system wannabe.

But you were not an officer. Has you been intelligent enough to be one, you would recognize that immigration is different, You keep spouting off about shit that no one has mentioned, like military tribunals. Got a link to any of your bullshit spewing?