Supreme Court Lifts Limits on Immigration-Enforcement Tactics in Los Angeles (for now at least)

[Concerned American]

The executive and legislative branches all involve democratic voting

That's when the choice is made. The elected officials have been given that power by the people. Sorry it doesn't comport with your British sensabilities.

 

[Dagoth-Ur]

SCOTUS needs an enforcement arm to police rouge fed courts.

Send in the Marshals.

 

[Rawley]

Once again, SCOTUS vacates a temporary hold on the a President’s policy re apprehension of illegal aliens.

Supreme Court Lifts Limits on Immigration Raids in Los Angeles — The Wall Street Journal

Order lets Trump administration proceed with patrols that earlier targeted largely Latino areas

apple.news

Maybe some national bar association can step up to educate the lower courts and the parties that the lower courts are NOT empowered to put themselves into the shoes of the President. The Judicial Branch is NOT the Executive Branch.

For now, a win for the Trump Administration and for the Constitution.

Have you seen any indication that they would change their minds on the merits when/if the appeal gets to them?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

That's when the choice is made. The elected officials have been given that power by the people.

Yes I know, I think it would be better if the public also got to elect the supreme court justices.

Sorry it doesn't comport with your British sensibilities.

What are you sorry about? what did you do?

 

[Scoutster]

 

[Concerned American]

Yes I know, I think it would be better if the public also got to elect the supreme court justices.

What are you sorry about? what did you do?

The public has a say when the executive's choice is confirmed by the 100 member senate. There is that. As for sorry, you're right--IDGAF if it comports with your British sensabilities or not. THAT'S THE WAY IT IS, GET USED TO IT. LOL

 

[Dante]

Links to opinions. I have discussed this at length in the past with other works of actual value to the discussions there.

You are off topic. I thought that had been mentioned already.

Start your own thread.

Nope. I am stating, accurately, why the Framers made sure to avoid the creation of these United States as a so-called “democracy.” But I won’t assist you in your deflection efforts from the thread topic.

Do you vaguely recall the TOS for using this Board? You should. You agreed to them, the dainty, you little twit troll.

As Ben Franklin said immediately after the completion of the Constitution, when asked what the Congress had given the people: “a republic if you can keep it.”

We all anticipate another thread from you, the dainty, arguing against Dr. Franklin.

You are using the term "democracy" in ways the founders did not. I've listed links to evidence? You? Speaking out of your ass once again.

next

 

[BackAgain]

Have you seen any indication that they would change their minds on the merits when/if the appeal gets to them?

No. And just to be clear, I realize that predicting their eventual decisions is kind of pointless. But, at least for the moment, the “deadline” imposed in the lower court is gone.

The case will continue via the appeals process for however long it takes, now, without the Administration’s efforts being hobbled by an opinion of the lower court.

 

[BackAgain]

You are using the term "democracy" in ways the founders did not. I've listed links to evidence? You? Speaking out of your ass once again.

next

I am not discussing this off topic matter with you any further in this thread. Try to constrain your imbecility to discussing the thread topic.

Move along little troll.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

The public has a say when the executive's choice is confirmed by the 100 member senate. There is that.

Yes I know, I think it would be better if the public also got to elect the supreme court justices.

As for sorry, you're right--IDGAF if it comports with your British sensabilities or not. THAT'S THE WAY IT IS, GET USED TO IT. LOL

We were discussing the United States government not Britain.

 

[Dante]

Have you seen any indication that they would change their minds on the merits when/if the appeal gets to them?

Asking that imbecile this is just hilarious. He's always posing as an expert on law. The man can't even honor his own word, a promise and you expect him to...

The Supreme Court on Monday lifted a federal judge’s order prohibiting government agents from making indiscriminate immigration-related stops in the Los Angeles area that challengers called “blatant racial profiling.”

The court’s brief order was unsigned and gave no reasons. It is not the last word in the case, which is pending before a federal appeals court and may again reach the justices.

 

[1srelluc]

ROGUE, not rouge (red dye) Just sayin'

Damn spell check

 

[Meathead]

Yes I know, I think it would be better if the public also got to elect the supreme court justices.

What are you sorry about? what did you do?

It would certainly spared us from the two stupidest justices, Jackson and Sotomayor.

 

[BackAgain]

Asking that imbecile this is just hilarious. He's always posing as an expert on law. The man can't even honor his own word, a promise and you expect him to...

Oh. How usual. The dainty ^ is trolling and lying and using ad hominems again.

 

[Donald H]

And there's not a damn thing that the opposition to the regime can do about it!

And as is always the case with the rise of fasciam, the opposition has no strategy.

Why do they sit on their hands?

Because they see no threat.

 

[Dante]

Oh. How usual. The dainty ^ is trolling and lying and using ad hominems again.

The Failed Liability speaketh. Oh the drama! The drama. Play the victim with others. You have posted ad hominem attacks on numerous membetrs right here in this thread.

Don't make me go back to your major squelch of a welch on that bet on you leaving usmb.

You'll get SpankedAgain and a butt prosthesis will be in order

 

[BackAgain]

Have you seen any indication that they would change their minds on the merits when/if the appeal gets to them?

A line from the Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion:

There may be a clue in that.

 

[Meathead]

rise of fasciam, the opposition has no strategy.

Because they see no threat.

How could they when no one knows that is?

 

[Dante]

It's a huge error to have federal judges picked by a president, it has always seemed very odd to me that the public do not get a say in appointing these judges.

The executive and legislative branches all involve democratic voting but the people are excluded from the selection of the heads of the judicial branch, kind of undemocratic really.

We have this...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a169_5h25.pdf

and this...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25A169/369163/20250807171848424_Perdomo_Stay_Appl.pdf

What has happened is that:
quotes:
The Supreme Court on Monday lifted a federal judge’s order prohibiting government agents from making indiscriminate immigration-related stops in the Los Angeles area that challengers called “blatant racial profiling.”

The court’s brief order was unsigned and gave no reasons. It is not the last word in the case, which is pending before a federal appeals court and may again reach the justices.

 

[Dante]

A line from the Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion:

View attachment 1159639

There may be a clue in that.

and then there may not be. People may be seeing things again -- Better Call Durham!