"The courts have all of a sudden, out of nowhere, they said, maybe you have to have trials"

[80zephyr]

There’s no due process in war.

When was war declared? Have a link?

 

[SeaMajor7]

There’s no due process in war.

In what war did Obama kill an American citizen?

 

[Marener]

When was war declared? Have a link?

https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ40/PLAW-107publ40.pdf

 

[80zephyr]

https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ40/PLAW-107publ40.pdf

Its true.

The Obama administration today argued before a federal court that it should have unreviewable authority to kill Americans the executive branch has unilaterally determined to pose a threat.

"Not only does the administration claim to have sweeping power to target and kill U.S. citizens anywhere in the world, but it makes the extraordinary claim that the court has no role in reviewing that power or the legal standards that apply,

Sleep soundly, Trump haters.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Obama killed an American citizen without due process. He killed one that was 16 years old. You don't support the law.

No, he did not. The citizen committed suicide by hanging around with an enemy non-combatant.

Pick your friend closely, 80zephyr.

 

[Marener]

Its true.

The Obama administration today argued before a federal court that it should have unreviewable authority to kill Americans the executive branch has unilaterally determined to pose a threat.

"Not only does the administration claim to have sweeping power to target and kill U.S. citizens anywhere in the world, but it makes the extraordinary claim that the court has no role in reviewing that power or the legal standards that apply,

Sleep soundly, Trump haters.

So when did the right decide that the courts can review the presidents authority as commander in chief?

And it’s not anywhere in the world because it excludes any authority within the jurisdiction of the United States.

 

[80zephyr]

So when did the right decide that the courts can review the presidents authority as commander in chief?

And it’s not anywhere in the world because it excludes any authority within the jurisdiction of the United States.

You have to take that up with the ACLU.

Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority To Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones | American Civil Liberties Union

Federal Court Hears Arguments Today In ACLU And CCR Case Challenging Administration's Claimed Authority To Assassinate Americans It Designates Threats...

www.aclu.org

 

[Marener]

You have to take that up with the ACLU.

Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority To Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones | American Civil Liberties Union

Federal Court Hears Arguments Today In ACLU And CCR Case Challenging Administration's Claimed Authority To Assassinate Americans It Designates Threats...

www.aclu.org

I wasn’t aware the ACLU is a court.

Remind me which party was joyful at the idea of presidential immunity?

 

[0311]

A judge on Thursday denied the government’s request to pause the transfer of Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk, who is fighting deportation after she co-wrote an essay about Israel and the war in Gaza, back to Vermont.

U.S. District Judge William K. Sessions ruled that the federal government is now obligated to ensure that Öztürk, who is being held in Louisiana, is moved to Vermont by May 1. The Justice Department appealed Sessions’ previous order to transfer Öztürk to Vermont, where her habeas corpus petition challenging her detainment was filed. Federal officials had also asked Session to pause the order from taking effect while it was on appeal.

“For four weeks, the government has been detaining Ms. Ozturk for writing an op-ed,” Kaufman said in a statement Thursday afternoon. “And now, it is doing everything within its power to avoid having to justify what it has done, including filing a hail-mary appeal hoping to stop the district court from deciding her claims.”

Tufts student Rümeysa Öztürk must be moved to Vermont, judge rules

The federal government had tried to pause the detained transfer of the woman, who is fighting deportation.

www.nbcnews.com

Why is the regime so hesitant to try to prove their case against these actual and potential deportees?

Censorship in any form is wrong. Just because she wrote an editorial that the Felon-In-Chief is no excuse for putting her behind bars.

 

[berg80]

Obama killed an American citizen without due process. He killed one that was 16 years old. You don't support the law.

al-Awlaki's killing was authorized by a Bush era law called the Authorization to Use Military Force. He was an enemy combatant...........dope.

 

[CDN1]

You probably applauded Chump's sinking of the bipartisan bill which would have funded the processes required by law.

Typical MAGAt.

Lol. That bill allowed up to 5000 in per day. Look how far it has fallen now. Trump's EOs have been far more effective driving down border crossings. As were Biden's after he was forced into doing it for the election.

 

[80zephyr]

I wasn’t aware the ACLU is a court.

Remind me which party was joyful at the idea of presidential immunity?

All presidents have to have some immunity. I agree with how it came down.

 

[bendog]

Trump is showing his willful ignorance, his contempt for the rule of law, and his racism, bigotry, and hate.

It is a settled, accepted fact of Constitutional law that non-citizens have the right to due process.

yes, but due process under the 14th amend requires a person with a protected liberty or property interest must recieve a hearing before a neutral "magistrate" (not necessarily a judge or even a lawyer in some cases, btw) notice of the hearing, the right to retain counsel at their own expense and the right to introduce evidence at their hearing.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt5-6-2-3/ALDE_00013726/

And Trump is as usual just blowing something disgusting out of his enormous ass/ego. There's no jury. There's not really much time devoted to exchanging documents. The poor sob Garcia who wrongfully was sent to el salvadore was nevertheless "deportable" under two immigration judges's determinations

FALL 2019: Another immigration judge grants Abrego Garcia protection from removal to El Salvador, affirming his contention that he would be endangered by local gangs. But the judge denies blanket asylum, noting that “withholding from removal, in contrast to asylum, confers only the right not to be deported to a particular country rather than the right to remain in the U.S.” This point will become key to the Trump administration’s arguments.



MARCH 12, 2025: According to court documents, ICE agents arrest Abrego Garcia, telling him his “immigration status has changed.” He’s later deported to El Salvador’s CECOT prison.

MARCH 31: The Trump administration writes in a court filing that “ICE was aware of his protection from removal” to his home country but Abrego Garcia “was removed to El Salvador because of an administrative error.”

In their words: What judges and Trump's government say about Abrego Garcia's mistaken deportation

President Donald Trump’s administration has dug in on its contention that his government should not have to repatriate Kilmar Abrego Garcia, despite court rulings that he was wrongly deported and should be returned to the United States.

apnews.com

 

[struth]

There’s no due process in war.

since when?

 

[80zephyr]

al-Awlaki's killing was authorized by a Bush era law called the Authorization to Use Military Force. He was an enemy combatant...........dope.

Sure he was. But, how was he determined to be an enemy combatant? By a court? Or by someone just claiming he was?

 

[sartre play]

TOTAL agreement about doing something about immigration,
As long as it follows the laws of our country.

 

[struth]

yes, but due process under the 14th amend requires a person with a protected liberty or property interest must recieve a hearing before a neutral "magistrate" (not necessarily a judge or even a lawyer in some cases, btw) notice of the hearing, the right to retain counsel at their own expense and the right to introduce evidence at their hearing.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt5-6-2-3/ALDE_00013726/

The Supreme Court, however, has suggested that the extent of due process for aliens present in the United States may vary depending upon [the alien’s] status and circumstance. For instance, at times the Court has indicated that at least some of the constitutional protections to which an alien is entitled may turn upon whether the alien has been admitted into the United States or developed substantial ties to this country. Thus, there is some uncertainty regarding the extent to which due process considerations constrain Congress’s exercise of its immigration power with respect to aliens within the United States.

Additionally, in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the Supreme Court in 2020 held that an alien detained shortly after entering the United States could not constitutionally challenge a federal statute limiting judicial review of his expedited removal proceedings (a streamlined removal process applicable to aliens apprehended at or near the border)

The Court observed, moreover, that only aliens who have established connections in this country have due process protections in their removal proceedings.<


The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence indicates that, although aliens present within the United States generally have due process protections, the extent of those constitutional protections may depend on certain factors, including whether the alien has been lawfully admitted or developed ties to the United States, and whether the alien has engaged in specified criminal activity. Therefore, even with regard to aliens present within the United States, the Court has sometimes deferred to Congress’s policy judgments that limit the ability of some classes of aliens to contest their detention or removal.

 

[Rawley]

A judge on Thursday denied the government’s request to pause the transfer of Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk, who is fighting deportation after she co-wrote an essay about Israel and the war in Gaza, back to Vermont.

U.S. District Judge William K. Sessions ruled that the federal government is now obligated to ensure that Öztürk, who is being held in Louisiana, is moved to Vermont by May 1. The Justice Department appealed Sessions’ previous order to transfer Öztürk to Vermont, where her habeas corpus petition challenging her detainment was filed. Federal officials had also asked Session to pause the order from taking effect while it was on appeal.

“For four weeks, the government has been detaining Ms. Ozturk for writing an op-ed,” Kaufman said in a statement Thursday afternoon. “And now, it is doing everything within its power to avoid having to justify what it has done, including filing a hail-mary appeal hoping to stop the district court from deciding her claims.”

Tufts student Rümeysa Öztürk must be moved to Vermont, judge rules

The federal government had tried to pause the detained transfer of the woman, who is fighting deportation.

www.nbcnews.com

Why is the regime so hesitant to try to prove their case against these actual and potential deportees?

Why does this judge have jurisdiction?

 

[bendog]

The Supreme Court, however, has suggested that the extent of due process for aliens present in the United States may vary depending upon [the alien’s] status and circumstance. For instance, at times the Court has indicated that at least some of the constitutional protections to which an alien is entitled may turn upon whether the alien has been admitted into the United States or developed substantial ties to this country. Thus, there is some uncertainty regarding the extent to which due process considerations constrain Congress’s exercise of its immigration power with respect to aliens within the United States.

Additionally, in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the Supreme Court in 2020 held that an alien detained shortly after entering the United States could not constitutionally challenge a federal statute limiting judicial review of his expedited removal proceedings (a streamlined removal process applicable to aliens apprehended at or near the border)

The Court observed, moreover, that only aliens who have established connections in this country have due process protections in their removal proceedings.<


The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence indicates that, although aliens present within the United States generally have due process protections, the extent of those constitutional protections may depend on certain factors, including whether the alien has been lawfully admitted or developed ties to the United States, and whether the alien has engaged in specified criminal activity. Therefore, even with regard to aliens present within the United States, the Court has sometimes deferred to Congress’s policy judgments that limit the ability of some classes of aliens to contest their detention or removal.

Im not arguing.