Judge Rules Trump Cannot Use Alien Enemies Act for Deportations
However, the judge said his ruling does not stop the defendants “to continue removal proceedings or enforcement of any final orders of removal” under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez, Jr., of the Southern District of Texas – Brownsville Division ruled that President Donald Trump cannot use the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) for deportations.
The case is the one out of D.C. that has given Trump headaches. The Supreme Court said the D.C. District Court did not have jurisdiction over the case since the plaintiff’s “claims fall within the core of the writ of habeas corpus” and must take place within the district where they’re detained.
However, Rodriguez said his ruling does not stop the defendants “to continue removal proceedings or enforcement of any final orders of removal issued against” the plaintiffs “or against any member of the certified class, under the Immigration and Nationality Act.”
In other words, stick with the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The petitioners, identified as J.A.V., J.G.G., and W.G.H., all Venezuelans, claimed Trump’s administration violated their due process rights and denied that they belonged to Tren de Aragua (TdA).
“As a corollary, the Court concludes that a Presidential declaration invoking the AEA must include sufficient factual statements or refer to other pronouncements that enable a court to determine whether the alleged conduct satisfies the conditions that support the invocation of the statute,” wrote Rodriguez. “The President cannot summarily declare that a foreign nation or government has threatened or perpetrated an invasion or predatory incursion of the United States, followed by the identification of the alien enemies subject to detention or removal.”
Trump invoked the AEA and declared TdA a Foreign Terrorist Organization for “perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States.”
Trump ordered the deportations of members of TdA over the age 14 “as Alien Enemies.”
Rodriguez interprets the word “invasion” as when America is invaded “by a military force or an organized, armed force, with the purpose of conquering or obtaining control over territory.” Rodriguez wrote:
The Proclamation makes no reference to and in no manner suggests that a threat exists of an organized, armed group of individuals entering the United States at the direction of Venezuela to conquer the country or assume control over a portion of the nation. Thus, the Proclamation’s language cannot be read as describing conduct that falls within the meaning of “invasion” for purposes of the AEA. As for “predatory incursion,” the Proclamation does not describe an armed group of individuals entering the United States as an organized unit to attack a city, coastal town, or other defined geographical area, with the purpose of plundering or destroying property and lives. While the Proclamation references that TdA members have harmed lives in the United States and engage in crime, the Proclamation does not suggest that they have done so through an organized armed attack, or that Venezuela has threatened or attempted such an attack through TdA members. As a result, the Proclamation also falls short of describing a “predatory incursion” as that concept was understood at the time of the AEA’s enactment.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Complete BS ruling that the judge has no authority to make.
Explain why he doesn’t have authority to make that ruling, please?
More accurately, this judge is ignoring existing BINDING precedent. The Supreme Court has already confirmed the Executive’s authority pursuant to the Enemies & Aliens Act. THIS SCOTUS, as recently as this month, reaffirmed (in dicta) their earlier binding precedent.
The Supreme Court already found that the alien enemies Act is constitutional. That is the only jurisprudence we have on that act
This decision doesn’t find it un-constitutional. It finds Trump didn’t meet the criteria for the law he’s citing. Right or wrong, I would think that is within a court’s jurisdiction to decide.
Exactly. From day one I thought Trump was pushing the definitions in a law that was written to address nations. I was willing to wait and see if they would allow him to get away with it. It looks like they didn’t.
What the ruling removed the authority to make the determination of the existence of an “invasion” from the POTUS, where it belongs. A POTUS Is elected to use his judgement when it comes to national security. Effectively, the court said that a POTUS can’t make that determination unilaterally, yet doesn’t cite any authority for either of the other two branches to exercise their judgement in these matters. Certainly, the AEA didn’t give the Judiciary that authority to determine when an invasion is occurring, nor did it give that branch any other role in the process. When Congress passed the AEA, it gave the POTUS the authority to effectuate its exercise as the POTUS sees fit. If this gives the POTUS too much authority, Congress is responsible for making the correction, not a judge.
That is a decision for the political branches of government, not the judges.
It’s literally in the article with a link to another article explaining it !
Seems to be par for the course these days. “Make sh*t up…”
Having made this into a permanent injunction is to the upside, at least as I understand the rules. Trump can now appeal a final judgment to the circuit court, and possibly, based on how the statute reads, directly to the USSC.
We WANT the battle to be joined. Does Article II, section 1 mean a unitary president or not.
Goes to Fifth Circuit in New Orleans. Very conservative court. Wouldn’t be surprised if they act quickly.
Exactly. The law gives the president – AND ONLY THE PRESIDENT – the power to declare a predatory incursion. It doesn’t say he can only declare it if the courts agree. It give absolutely no authority to the courts. In the 1940s, SCOTUS agreed and said that yes, the law give the president very broad, sweeping authority, but that what congress enacted. And SCOTUS said the courts have no right to review the president’s decision.
AEA is executive authority. We have co-equal branches and each branch exercises its powers as it sees fit. In the Federalist Papers, Madison said the judicial was the weakest of the branches because it has no enforcement authority. And that is be deisgn because the judicial is not responsible to the people so has no enforcement powers.
To uphold the separation of power guaranteed in the constitution, Trump MUST IGNORE THIS RULING>
Spot on! One of the best observations of the AEA! Stated just as the act is written! I’ve read it over and over again. It states just as you have described. Good job!
Remember: This is one of Trump’s appointed Judges.
What is your purpose with these comments? Can you explain what you are trying to accomplish?
Remember: This is one of Junior’s “nickel a pop” garbage TDS posts.
So, as I figured it would eventually come to, this fight will be over the definition of things like “invasion.”
And I’m going to say that if you don’t define a massive foreign terrorist gang as invaders because the things they are doing are crimes> and NOT military action, you’re a fool.
an organized unit to attack a city, coastal town, or other defined geographical area, with the purpose of plundering or destroying property and lives
When a foreign gang moves across our border they do it entirely with the intent to “plunder” and “destroy lives.” And they move to specific cities to do so.
Maybe Trump needs to write all out in crayon for the judge.
A group of foreign criminals is in no way comparable to a foreign military.
I am sorry but you are spitting on the brave men who fought actual foreign militaries by comparing the two.
Do not for one second allow the delusion that a police officer arresting someone without incident is equivalent to the hell called Iwo Jima or the beaches of Normandy.
Are Vladimir Putin’s soldiers illegal immigrants in Ukraine or a foreign invasion?
Note the way Vladimir Putin’s government is the current government in Donbass, is Venezuela ruling Colorado and Arizona right now?
The president only has the power congress provides him period.
I do not want the next Democrat president to have absolute power and the price is a Republican president does not have absolute power either.
This is not “absolute power” this is about national security and defending against an attack on America.
You are a retard.
BTW, dem Presidents do whatever the hell they want, no matter what. Barky and Traitor Joe opening the border to orchestrate this invasion is what brought us to this point.
Biden/Obama lost in court and abided the court rulings around the clock.
This was literally a Trump appointed judge ruling that the law is the law and you can’t unilaterally reinterpret it.
Danny
Invasion would be backed by a Nation State.
Incursion would be non Nation State actors.
There’s a.difference between the two.which is why, logically, the Executive may respond unilaterally to one. Not for nothing but the next step in this stupid drama is for the Executive to use other powers. Say invoking the War Powers Act and turning loose the US Military for up to 60 days which is up to his discretion.
The Executive powers re National Security and Foreign Policy are not justiciable. The remedy is impeachment and removal or the electorate voting him out. That’s the check. The Judiciary is deliberately stoking and provoking a dangerous path. The Judiciary has zero ability to enforce its rulings and the sooner SCOTUS slaps down District and Circuit Judges seeking to usurp the powers of the Executive the further from danger we will be.
No whining when/if Stephen Miller comes out and announces the Judiciary can pound sand b/c the Executive is still gonna undertake an action in order to preserve the powers.and prerogatives of the Executive from unconstitutional interference by the Judiciary. Fair warning.
I have to disagree. An invasion is strategic while an incursion is tactical. That’s how I use those words. An invasion consists of many incursions, if not done all at once.
The raids Poncho Villa conducted into the USA were ‘incursions’ by Brigands which are ‘Pirates of the land’ aka terrorist/criminal organizations in modern parlance.
Can an incursion be conducted by a Nation State? Sure.so was Grenada an Invasion or an incursion? How about Panama? Any incursions Nation States direct are usually small and limited almost always clandestine black ops with a very few limited exceptions where they are done in full light of day as a visible, public object lesson.
The tactical v strategic distinction doesn’t work for me in such a clear cut way. Hitting an Iranian nuke facility with 3 dozen tomahawk missiles and follow on air strike of fuel air bombs would be hitting a strategic target with limited forces in a compressed time frame which kinda says tactical. D-Day was strategic.
This is a good analogy. The Villa raids in Columbus NM are probably the closest historical analogy we have to a non-state “invasion” or “incursion” of the territorial US. And the Villa gang is a great analogy to a modern cartel or street gang. I think what is hanging the judges up is the mental leap between that incursion — by an armed and organized group of men — and today’s incursion, by a group of men whose motives of “organized incursion” are unproven and nonobvious, and who armed themselves only after arriving here.
The U,S, Invasion of Cambodia was without a declaration of war so not labelled an invasion. The law in question has always been thought to mean that sort of situation not illegal immigration which literally has different statutes passed by congress.
The statute has only ever been understood to mean military action by a state actor which is why we have different laws for detailing the procedure for illegal immigration.
Look into one President Eisenhower.
Look into how he deported MILLIONS
This isn’t a ruling against deportations it is a ruling against changing the law by executive fiat. In other words it is exactly what Trump appointed that judge to do. You have previously brought up usage against Germans.
America was militarily occupying Germany and denying Germans self government at the same time. Surrender doesn’t end war a treaty does.
It will no doubt be appealed but the other side has literally centuries of nobody ever thinking that law applied to common criminals.
This ruling is not radical, unconstitutional, nor unprecedented.
In our system of law the president does not get to just rewrite or reinterpret what has been on the books.
Don’t believe me?
Here is the total list of times the Alien Enemies Act was used prior to today
War of 1812
WW1
WW2
If you had asked a lawyer the day before Trump took office if the Alien Enemies Act was dealing with wars and undeclared wars or available for common police work you would have been told wars and undeclared wars by 100% of the people you had asked it is just absurd to claim otherwise.
Danny,
As you point out the lack of frequency of using it means the applicable case law is very sparse so any Attorney can offer an opinion and be wrong…. See the day before the Dobbs decision about whether abortion could be limited to 14 weeks by the States.
Further the only case law on use of.AEA outside of a hot war was ruled justified in the post WWII era several YEARS after Germany unconditionally surrendered. Hard to claim a war exists and is ongoing if your opponent stopped fighting and gave up.
It doesn’t take a ‘war’. It takes Congress making a declaration of War (or AUMF) OR the President declaring an incursion exists or is imminent. You can try and argue that incursion is only formal members of military of a foreign Nation all.day and it doesn’t matter b/c if Congress wanted to specify that they could have. They didn’t.They left the determination up to the decision of the President. IMO it transfers too much power to the Executive but I didn’t draft it and we’re all going to have love with it or sack up and get a majority to overturn or amend the AEA to reflect your point of view.
Foreign Policy and National.Security issues are the province of the President these decisions are not justiciable foe the very simple reason that they would render the President unable to perform the duties if he had to deal.with every District CT issuing rulings.
Like it or not much of our gov’t is designed to be used by people of goodwill and character who are.trusted with wide power and even wider discretion to use them, set the timing of their use or decline to use them entirely. The check is twofold; our Representatives and Senators using impeachment/removal from office or ‘We the People’ voting him out at the next election. Like or lump it that’s the truth.
FWIW I don’t see you fitting Poncho Villa or the subjugation of the Indian Tribes into your framework. Especially the Tribes who were definitely NOT Citizens at the time. The US military was used domestically to find them, remove the willing and destroy the unwilling.
Read up on how insurgencies work.
I am assuming the work by stealth or by misdirection. To put a rather simple spin on it.
So are you saying a police officer calmly arresting someone followed by the state presenting a case to the judge for deportation is equivalent to the Iraq War?
You are insulting the men and women in uniform who fight our wars by comparing them to cops.
I am sorry but you are spitting on the brave men who fought actual foreign militaries by comparing the two.
And this is what makes you an idiot. Don’t abuse my service in that way.
I served in uniform and claim cops are equivalent to soldiers again and I am calling you out as a liar.
A predatory incursion does not have to be done by a military. And, that is a decision that is solely executive privilege.
So why is it that Eisenhower was unaware of this when he deported millions?
Was the men who saw off the Germans in Europe an idiot?
Fûck you Danny. Ever wear a uniform in the US Armed Forces? If not, don’t you EVER consider blasphemous commentary about what the military does and what constitutes an invasion.
If you have worn a uniform, you must have been the private in charge of 50 feet of flight line.
I know you’re going for the old joke here. But I worked with the sky cops who were in charge of a section of flightline, and those guys were much more honorable than Danny. (Especially ones who put senior officers face down in the snow because said officer thought DYKWIA would work on a SAC ramp.)
I was an 18 year old 811X0 at Loring AFB.
The favorite saying was “Do not confuse your rank with my authority.”
It was used judiciously, but with great joy. Especially when someone decided to cross the red line into a No Lone Zone between B52s in the Alpha Parking Ramp.
That’s why we were, and still are, considered the 42nd Security Police Ramp Rats.
Our game with the new JEEPs was to send them to base supply to get 50 feet of flight line.
He would have been the one painting rocks because that’s all he could be trusted to do.
Hey Chief- Its been years since I’ve seen Loring AFB mentioned anywhere! Too bad they closed it. I’ve been back there to visit a couple of times. Each time I go, more and more gets removed and erased.
Oh Danny, the Congress doesn’t give the power that he has. The United States Constitution does! As for the AEA, the president does have absolute power! Read the act!
The act gives him ability to react to a foreign invasion/incursion.
Venezualan military has not come to America and does not intend to.
For what in invasion looks like see Ukraine right now. Ukrainians are right now living under Russian rule in a fifth of the country.
The law also references “incursion”
Like what we did in Cambodia.
Or like what Russians did in Hungary
Or like Meiji Era Japanese forces in Taiwan in reaction to Taiwanese piracy
The law is very clearly talking about attacks by foreign nations we literally have statutes about illegal immigration separate from AEA.
An invasion is an invasion. It can be staged by a nation-state or by a non-state actor. The Act does not distinguish.
This is the next
“Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government,”
Let my capitalize the relevant part
BY ANY FOREIGN NATION OR GOVERNMENT
In other words nations only.
The president only has the power congress provides him period.
So, you’re saying when Congress passed the AEA, which gives the POTUS the authority to eject persons “invading” the country, it withheld from the POTUS the authority to determine for himself when an invasion is occurring? If this is so, where are you reading that the authority to declare an invasion was given to anyone other than the POTUS? Certainly, Congress didn’t retain the authority to itself, nor did they give the authority to the Judiciary, nor did Congress indicate who else it may be who has this authority.
“Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government,”
Read the last sentence I quoted
It very explicitly answers if the act is about illegal immigration or a military attack.
“Nation or government”
We are not at war with Venezuala, and the Venezualan Military has not perpetrated an attack without a declaration of war either.
I find it highly insulting that people would dare compare service in the United States Military including my own to being a police officer.
That “Nation or Government” the terrorist designation by definition means it is not “nation or government”.
Take a look at the definition of “predatory incursion”: (A predatory incursion refers to an aggressive or hostile entry into a territory, often with the intent to exploit or harm. In legal contexts, it can be used to describe actions that threaten a nation’s security or sovereignty.)
I think this applies better than “invasion”. Although, as a patriot, I can see this applying also.
FYI, Fernando Rodriguez, Jr., of the Southern District of Texas, was appointed by Trump.
He appointed many that were presented to him by the Rinos
Here is the text
“Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government,”
He had no choice the text of the AEA and the intent of the AEA is against Trump using it without either a formally declared war or undeclared war.
Referred to President Trump by none other then mitch mcconnell. Senate majority leader at the time and a major F**king rino!!
For literally centuries the act in question was thought to be what is actually discussed a foreign war, or an invasion by a foreign military without a declaration of war.
Radically rewriting what a law means is in no way something that is promised success or is even promising at all.
Before demanding that the president is absolute while the president is Republican look at the economic reports available today the economy officially declined.
Do you want a Democrat to use presidential monarchy without restriction from the courts in 2029?
No? Good then we could allow the courts to determine if Trump’s radical reinterpretation of a law that has been entirely about foreign military invasion for centuries is the correct one.
The price of the presidency having limited powers when a Democrat is in power is it also has limited powers when a Republican is in power. The gnawing and gnashing of teeth over losing here is exactly what Democrats did the endless times Biden was crushed in court.
We really need to get back to both sides accepting the judiciary.
But it didn’t apply to Dems as seen with FJB. An unchecked judiciary is a loss of checks and balances.
Democrats have not given a single, solitary fuck about the judiciary going back to Andrew Jackson. This “both sides” nonsense only works when both parties show a willingness to adhere to any semblance of “accepting the judiciary”.
Since Democrats have shown multiple times over the past few decades that they have no desire to do this, Republicans have nothing to gain from doing so either, aside from moral grandstanding about how they’ll do effectively nothing while their opponents walk all over them.
“Aside from moral grandstanding about how they’ll do effectively nothing while their opponents walk all over them.”
You’ve described Danny to a T. Well done, CharlesO.
How limited were Biden’s powers when he opened the borders to millions of illegal aliens and flew them all across the country? Illegal aliens who, by the way, are counted in the census for congressional representation?
or an invasion by a foreign military
No. By a foreign power.
I assume, after reading that, that you didn’t think the invasion of Kosovo by Albanians (civilians) was a thing.
What we’re doing is discussing the issues at root in the attempt to use the AEA. What you’re doing is concern trolling that we should just accept whatever the judiciary says. Sorry, but that’s how we got the awful Roe v Wade decision.
You only listed two. There are three triggers
What a crock. The other side is NOT acting in good faith, and good faith is necessary for things to work. Pretending that Democrats will act in good faith if only Republicans do is completely naive. Have you not learned a thing?
Stop being a dip sh** danny! The AEA does mention the wording “foreign military”!! The the fu**king act!! Your pissing people off because of your BS.
Were you in a coma during Obama and Dementia Joe’s reigns…. They flaunted laws and the Constitution… made up their crap powers out of thin air and bragged they had no authority to do what they were doing…..and judges did NOTHING
TdA is being used essentially as an agent of the Venezuelan government to conduct state-sponsored terrorism in the United States, and the power to make that determination doesn’t require a declaration of war by Congress within the AEA itself. The language of the Act itself seems to give broad authority to the President to act on matters such as this, and if such things as letters of marque and reprisal were to be issued against the United States by a hostile foreign power like Cuba or Iran.
At the time of the AEA enactment, Joe Biden and all of the traitors working under him would have been quickly identified as enemies of the state for having orchestrated an invasion of America, and would have been dealt with swiftly and with ultimate finality.
Tens of millions constitutes an “invasion” regardless of mechanical “arms”. It is the quantity that is the “arms”. To quote one of the democrats’ favorite political philosophers, “Quantity is a quality all of its own.”
A human wave is an attack the same as a small group with weapons. Tens of millions implanted in the nation is an invasion. It was orchestrated by Biden and the dems, with enthusiastic participation by foreign governments, so-called NGOs, and lots of fake charities – all of which are guilty of waging war on America.
This judge is a complete joke.
Why do we continue to use the law to defend the lawless?
It’s suicidal to devote yourself to principles when your enemies have none
The law isn’t the problem. THe fact that a federal judge thinks that tens of millions of illegals swamping America, destroying us by nearly every vector of attack on a country, is not an invasion is the problem.
Just the costs of illegals stops services from going to American citizens, which costs lives, is more than enough to term this an invasion, since the result is not different than an armed attack would be – worse, even because of how thorough and insidious it is.
Meh. The Judge is demanding a war exist. Ok, lets.get an AUMF from Congress for terrorist criminal organizations. Heck the Executive can just use the War Powers Act and use the Military for 60 days and during that period there’s definitely a ‘war’ enough for using the AEA and a justification to use the Military to round up Aliens from the Nations these terrorist/criminal organizations spring from. Not sure why the leftists want to reach that state of affairs but if they insist…
We could just revive the GWOT one.
The reason we have abruptly transitioned from rule of law to rule of EO is precisely because nobody can get Congress to do 80% of the crap that it’s their DUTY to do. All of this circus is to do end runs around Congress because Congress is effectively in rigor mortis.
I don’t disagree at all. Congress would much rather shift over responsibility to the Executive Branch than make.tough decisions and take tough votes that their constituents might not like. Every time someone like Rep Massie raises up the issue of Congress kicking the can down the road or handing more power to.the Executive he gets all sorts of flack for not being a team player.
It’s not just the illegal aliens that are “swamping” us. The AEA usage applies specifically to the militant gangs from foreign powers who have invaded us for the express purpose of “plunder” and destroying lives. So we’re not talking the invasion of Jose, Maria, and little Pedro* coming here for a better life. Trump specifically targeted the groups he designated (under powers the law gives him) as terrorists.
My problem (aside from the reasoning of “well, that’s not how we think of this”) is that Trump already designated them terrorists. That means they are acting against us violently. And, since they’re foreign-backed, well, that bit is satisfied, too. If he has a problem with them being identified as terrorists, then he needs to go back to THAT decision and try to claim the President doesn’t have the power to do that.
(And, mind you, I think a lot of this is exposing places we need to change how the President’s power is molded and shaped by Congress – where it’s allowed to be.)
Forgot the footnote…
(* That’s not me being racist. It’s how the narrative is pushed by the left and the media, to obtain sympathy for the invaders, of whatever stripe.)
You really going to make me quote A Man For All Seasons?
Because principles are the things by which you abide, because they’re RIGHT, not because they’re convenient.
Correct ruling . If it goes to the SC , it will be upheld 7-2. Alito has gone off the deep end.
Wrong website for you dude. Time for you to move on!
How do you know? Taking lessons from Terry Moran?
Stuck on stupid as always….
You’re Oh-For-21 so far, dipstick.
I bet you’ll hit oh for 30 before the end of the day.
Unless that dufus Junior comes along to bail you out.
Oh? Since when does a Federal judge get to make a determination like that? Leaving aside the fact that the judge ignored the concept of separation of powers in his ruling, he has no knowledge whatsoever of whether foreign nations are facilitating the invasion or not. Or did he appointed himself the Director of National Intelligence when no one was looking?
Imagine after Pearl Harbor a Federal Judge saying, “You cannot declare war on the Axis until you prove in a court of law that the Japan government was really behind the alleged bombings.”
War Powers Act
More appropriately, this judge needs to be asked, “If the President can’t, then who the hell can?” I mean, this passage is worthy of a dope slap.
Exactly. By making a determination that there is no invasion, the judge has presumed he has the authority to make that determination. Certainly, Congress didn’t give the Judiciary that authority when it passed the AEA.
This is such a simple issue. Are you a citizen? Do you have our permission to be here? No? Get the hell out. No jury trial, just GTFO. Immigration has never been handled in the criminal courts because illegal aliens are not entitled to use our court system to justify their illegal squatting.
Except this IS more than that. Because Trump used a particular law to accelerate the removal of certain people. This judgment only applies to that.
But, having said that, your comment is otherwise correct.
Joe gave a whole bunch of people “permission to be here” … illegally.
Judges willing to tell him that “the president can’t make that determination by himself” were notably absent.
“The President cannot summarily declare that a foreign nation or government has threatened or perpetrated an invasion or predatory incursion of the United States, followed by the identification of the alien enemies subject to detention or removal.”
Somebody help me here, where is this condition stated in the act? Is that not the whole f’ing point of the act. That it is up to the president to make such a declaration. What am I missing?
EXACTLY!!
Somebody must make that determination, and Congress sure as hell didn’t give the Judiciary that authority.
We are in the throes of a judicial coup, for lack of a better term. Can’t go on like this.
And yet, Congress continues to rape little girls and boys, get fat and rich off the backs of the American taxpayer, and flush our country down the toilet.
You stupid bastards better make some decisions quick, because Americans will get to the point where we will decide who governs this nation.
Venezuelans or Americans.
Or a constitutional crisis!
I agree, but who is gonna stop this?
I’m sure the president, any president, is privy to highly classified information that could not be disclosed in open court. These district court judges need to stop dictating foreign policy.
I have seen some reports that the Maduro government is emptying Venezuela’s prisons and training TdA. Hence, an invasion.
That info about Maduro is years old, even.
And there are circumstances for handling classified information in court, including court records.
Another District Judge. They’re like ants at a picnic. It’s hard to take them seriously, given they seem to be swarming the current Administration. Thanks , SCOTUS.
Somebody get that can of raid
¥>*% da judge ignore Judge. How many troops does judge have? Eliminate fed judgeships except SC which is in constitution, like t Jefferson did.
BREAKING NEWS: effective Friday, May 2, 2025, Donald Trump will resign the presidency to become a more powerful district court judge in order that he may run the executive branch more effectively.
That is all.
LOL.
Winner!
Who’s gonna do what if Trump tells the judge GFY and starts loading up the airplanes?
Why deport invaders when you should just shoot them?
Supply of ammo vs renewables like airplanes and buses?
Drop them out of planes then. Problem of renewables solved.
It’s a district court judge. Ignore it and continue to deport.
When the Supreme Court finally rules, then we can consider whether we will adhere to that ruling, since the Supreme Court has basically nullified itself.
What bothers me the most is the plain obstruction by judges and democrats. These alien illegal invaders have to go. Period. Instead of suggesting ways within our system to accomplish this these anti-american assholes obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. They are a bigger problem than the illegal aliens.
Consider that the judge did give a method to cure the error (I think that’s the legal phrase). He just has to put out some sort of reasoning on applying the AEA in these cases, beyond an “I said so.”
That might be right and it might be wrong. But it IS “suggesting a way.”
(I happen to think the judge is wrong, as discussed above.)
It’s a matter of efficiency, If you have to give each and every illegal alien, or even those from just cartels, a trial before deporting them it will take forever to process them. Frankly I think it should be sufficient to confirm whether the person is illegal or legal. Illegal -> gone. I don’t care about extenuating circumstances. I don’t care if he is at risk in his home country. I don’t care about climate change. It’s not our problem.
I don’t think that was the suggestion.
The suggestion parallels the one in the 1995 SCOTUS beatdown of the first Gun Free School Zones Act.:
In short: Congress didn’t cite its constitutional authority to make this a federal crime, and the Commerce Clause alone is too much of a reach.
Congress simply re-passed the law with a couple added phrases to the effect of, “We’re legislating under the Commerce Clause because these guns have moved in interstate commerce” and that was that.
The point is, it doesn’t require a whole raft of individual due process hearings, just one action by Congress.
The jury is out as to which could be achieved faster.
Illegal aliens don’t get “due process of law,” because “due process of law” can only be invoked when life, liberty, or property is threatened. Those illegally in the country have no liberty interest in remaining here (the criminal has no right to continue the commission of his crime). Every alien who enters this country voluntarily submits to a special set the rules governing their presence here. How much “due process” is granted them depends on their status as aliens legally in the country. By entering the country illegally, an alien volunteers to be subject to whatever rules the sovereign cares to allow him. He is not a guest, he’s an intruder.
Frankly I think it should be sufficient to confirm whether the person is illegal or legal. Illegal -> gone.
This I(S the process.
It’s called ‘expedited removal’ and it IS the ‘due process’ that someone caught illegally in the US is entitled to–by law.
What they’re doing is trying to make everyone think that ‘due process’ means lawyers judges, and a day in co0urt for every person who sneaks over the border
To be accurate- hard to describe it as an invasion when Biden was inviting them, flying them in for free, and giving them social security numbers and full benefits.
At least the Japanese used their own planes to invade us.
Any metal in those planes was probably the end result of scrap iron we sold them before we cut out the supply that is. Same for their carriers.
Interesting.
I know the Nazis over in Germany and the labor/concentration camps were busy with the chemistry and manufacturing of synthetic rubber, because they didn’t have supplies from the tropics where rubber trees are. They were also short of petroleum, the original reason for invading the USSR.
Given the difference in access to natural resources it’s amazing they made as much a war of it as they did.
One of the reasons japan went to war with us is because we stopped shipments of scrap iron and possibly oil. We weren’t happy with their actions in china and that was our response. Some say Roosevelt did this deliberately to get us into war. Don’t think they expected Japan to attack as widely as they did and at Pearl Harbor as well. Also I dont think they expected Germany to stupidly declare war on us. Unforced error on Germany;s part,
Someone was inviting them, flying them in etc. It was an invasion, regardless of who was leading the operation.
I don’t recall his speech where he described it as his foreign policy. And one can understand the secret subversive policy as an invasion, without going so far as to indict and try its leader who has after all been judged as a nice old man who is mentally incompetent to stand trial.
This seems very easy to deal with. Provide a bit more evidence of the invasion, don’t necessarily satisfy the judge’s description of what he thinks an invasion is, and continue to deport.
Any sort of evidence of coordinated action is enough. The judge realistically doesn’t get to demand more than that, and having left such an easy hurdle to cross, now Trump knows exactly what 2 additional pages he has to write.
Yes, genius. That avoids needing Congress to do anything. And it’s perfectly in line with the way Biden handled student loans, so Democrats can STFU.
None of this should require an “act of Congress”. The benefit to getting legislation is that president AOC can’t easily reverse it.
So, it follows, save the legislative bullets for well chosen strategic uses. It would be a shame to waste one here, because if AOC (I am using her as proxy for woke-shithead-president-of-the-future) wanted to host another invasion, she could just call it something else; and the congressional action this judge might really want would not bind or restrict her.
The Court’s reasoning is fallacious.
The key question is whether the conduct described by Trump rises to the level of a predatory incursion. It holds that because Congress, in 1798, did not expressly contemplate those words applying to the organized criminal activities directed against the citizens of the United States described in Trump’s proclamation as being conducted by TdA at the direction and with the support of the Maduro regime, the proclamation fails.
But this reasoning is in itself fallacious. In 1798, this kind of state organized and directed diffuse criminal invasion did not exist. So it is hardly surprising that there is nothing to show whether Congress considered such conduct to be a “predatory incursion.”
The situation is analogous to the application of the 4th amendment prohibition to unreasonable searches and seizures applies to modern technological invasions such as drone searches or videotaping of property. The founders did not expressly intend the amendment to apply to such activity. But the Court has held that they intended the principles underlying the amendment should be applied to these kinds of new circumstances as they arise.
So here, A predatory incursion should be read to include any directed or coordinated entrance into the United States of foreign nationals for purposes contrary to the interests or law of the United States.
Yes it should be a small step to get past this and, if the judge doesn’t see it that way, the appellate levels will, and now the judge has shot his bolt.
Pancho Villa’s incursions into the US come to mind. The US launched a military expedition into Mexico (a sovereign country) to chase him down. No war. No involvement of a foreign sovereign. But a military response nevertheless. I imagine today’s judges would have told Woodrow Wilson he didn’t have the authority to make an incursion into the sovereign territory of Mexico because Villa’s raids weren’t “invasions” nor done at the direction of a foreign government.
An invasive species is an introduced species that harms its new environment.[2] Invasive species adversely affect habitats and bioregions, causing ecological, environmental, and/or economic damage.
I have seen Los Angeles and many other areas – illegals qualify as an invasion 😉
A predatory incursion is what the Vikings did in their day. Gang bangers are their modern day equivalent – here to plunder, rape and maybe stay a while.