boyst Posted April 2 Posted April 2 1 minute ago, Roundybout said: No, the second judge gave him a stay of removal following 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A). https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815.11.3.pdf That is how judicial review works, yes. The legislative branch should pass a proper law, then. So the first judges ruling was ignored and a second judge came in and deemed it that he may stay. So, judge shopping and getting the favorable rule is acceptable? The guy committed a crime and was allowed to continue living in the US based on an individuals interpretation. The judge concluded he alone may decide this fate despite. The legistative branch, in your opinion, did not get the law right to the tinyith t being crossed therefore all else is moot. That the system was not allowed to carry out its fully due process through trial, review, and appeal. Does this belief carry through in all cases involving politics? To say that OJ is innocent, Trump did not commit any crimes related to January 6th, Clinton didn't committ crimes, and Nixon was innocent of all activities?
BillsFanNC Posted April 2 Author Posted April 2 Newsflash: Roundy isn't in favor of deporting anyone for any reason. Ignore.
Roundybout Posted April 2 Posted April 2 15 minutes ago, boyst said: So the first judges ruling was ignored and a second judge came in and deemed it that he may stay. So, judge shopping and getting the favorable rule is acceptable? The guy committed a crime and was allowed to continue living in the US based on an individuals interpretation. The judge concluded he alone may decide this fate despite. The legistative branch, in your opinion, did not get the law right to the tinyith t being crossed therefore all else is moot. That the system was not allowed to carry out its fully due process through trial, review, and appeal. Does this belief carry through in all cases involving politics? To say that OJ is innocent, Trump did not commit any crimes related to January 6th, Clinton didn't committ crimes, and Nixon was innocent of all activities? Welcome to the world of the American judicial system! Don’t like a ruling? Argue better! Roe vs. Wade was on shaky legal ground, and it took 50 years for the right argument to challenge it. It’s frustrating, but an important guardrail against tyranny. 13 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Newsflash: Roundy isn't in favor of deporting anyone for any reason. Ignore. Incorrect
aristocrat Posted April 2 Posted April 2 1 hour ago, Roundybout said: Not particularly, hence why I believe we should be focusing our efforts on actual gang members and not innocent people. which they have been doing. gotta love you ignore all the crimes committed for years and suddenly go absolutely nuts for this guy. classic roundy 1
BillsFanNC Posted April 2 Author Posted April 2 3 minutes ago, aristocrat said: which they have been doing. gotta love you ignore all the crimes committed for years and suddenly go absolutely nuts for this guy. classic roundy And there you have it. It would be like attempting to have a reasonable discussion about football strategy with someone who insists in his belief that the game is played with a hockey puck. Green sky. Ignore.
Roundybout Posted April 2 Posted April 2 6 minutes ago, aristocrat said: which they have been doing. gotta love you ignore all the crimes committed for years and suddenly go absolutely nuts for this guy. classic roundy Will you be the first MAGA here to acknowledge that the Trump administration has admitted they illegally deported him in violation of a court order? I am not interested in irrelevant crimes. I am interested in this particular case.
aristocrat Posted April 2 Posted April 2 4 minutes ago, Roundybout said: I am not interested in irrelevant crimes. I am interested in this particular case. i'm sorry what?
Roundybout Posted April 2 Posted April 2 Just now, aristocrat said: i'm sorry what? Hahahaha you couldn’t even do it. You couldn’t say the Trump campaign put out a mea culpa. Cult.
JFKjr Posted April 2 Posted April 2 Roundy is MUCH more concerned about gang members' rights than Americans who have been killed or assaulted by the gang members. Oh, excuse me, I mean DADS. 1
Roundybout Posted April 2 Posted April 2 1 minute ago, JFKjr said: Roundy is MUCH more concerned about gang members' rights than Americans who have been killed or assaulted by the gang members. Oh, excuse me, I mean DADS. Except this guys wasn’t a gang member. And if they can deport him for no reason or due process, they sure as hell could deport you or me.
Roundybout Posted April 2 Posted April 2 12 minutes ago, B-Man said: And the lefties keep falling for it. . He wasn’t in MS-13! Why is this so difficult!!
boyst Posted April 2 Posted April 2 3 hours ago, Roundybout said: Welcome to the world of the American judicial system! Don’t like a ruling? Argue better! Roe vs. Wade was on shaky legal ground, and it took 50 years for the right argument to challenge it. It’s frustrating, but an important guardrail against tyranny. Incorrect so how do we fix judge shopping? what is the correct answer for the guy deported?
B-Man Posted April 2 Posted April 2 The Atlantic’s Giant Fake News Screw-Up: It is not a human tragedy if somebody who is involved in MS-13 ends up being removed from the country. The media are on the hunt for a bad story they can hang around President Trump’s neck. Why? Because President Trump’s approval rating continues to hover around 50%, which is a historic high for him. The SignalGate story basically went nowhere because the truth is that everybody has, at one point or another, included somebody in a group chat by accident and it gets very awkward. The actual result of the Signal chat was kind of an embarrassing snafu. The military strikes on the Houthis, however, were totally successful. The United States military is currently eviscerating the Houthis in Yemen. So the media continue on the hunt. https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-atlantics-giant-fake-news-screw-up?topStoryPosition=undefined
The Frankish Reich Posted April 2 Posted April 2 15 hours ago, Roundybout said: "The evidence" Is that the SWORN testimony of ICE? What evidence is there? That's cute but you haven't actually proven anything except that you prefer a dictatorship unchecked by the judiciary. Let's look at how the process worked here. And by "worked" I mean "reached a rational decision based on the available facts" up until Trump ICE mistakenly (read: illegally) deported him to El Salvador. - arrested, detained, and brought before an Immigration Judge. He asks to be released on bail to fight his "withholding of removal" (a lesser type of asylum) case from the outside. The judge considers all the evidence, finds that he is an MS 13 gang members, and orders him detained. He'll have to fight his case from the inside. - Judge holds a hearing whether he should be deported. Finds that yes, he is subject to deportation. But also finds that his evidence shows that he'd likely be persecuted if returned to El Salvador. That allows ICE to send him to any country other than El Salvador. Apparently ICE doesn't appeal and accepts that result. So we have a judge who determined that he is a gang member, but that he would be persecuted if sent back to El Salvador. And so he's protected from deportation to that country. This is based on our treaty obligation not to send someone back to a country if he/she has established that he/she would be subjected to extreme abuse. We, as a country, agreed to this standard after WW2. So did almost all other countries. It is the law. I don't know if/why he was released after his case was done. The Trump administration is correct in trying to find alternative countries to accept these aliens who can't (for legal or practical reasons) be sent back to their native country. None of that changes the fact that this deportation was against the law. It was a "mistake" as the White House admits, but it was also a mistake that resulted in a violation of the law. He should be brought back, not to be set free, but to be held in detention until some other country agrees to take him. His wife and kid can join him there. I have a rather quaint (these days) belief that our government should follow the laws it has enacted.
Orlando Buffalo Posted April 2 Posted April 2 3 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: Let's look at how the process worked here. And by "worked" I mean "reached a rational decision based on the available facts" up until Trump ICE mistakenly (read: illegally) deported him to El Salvador. - arrested, detained, and brought before an Immigration Judge. He asks to be released on bail to fight his "withholding of removal" (a lesser type of asylum) case from the outside. The judge considers all the evidence, finds that he is an MS 13 gang members, and orders him detained. He'll have to fight his case from the inside. - Judge holds a hearing whether he should be deported. Finds that yes, he is subject to deportation. But also finds that his evidence shows that he'd likely be persecuted if returned to El Salvador. That allows ICE to send him to any country other than El Salvador. Apparently ICE doesn't appeal and accepts that result. So we have a judge who determined that he is a gang member, but that he would be persecuted if sent back to El Salvador. And so he's protected from deportation to that country. This is based on our treaty obligation not to send someone back to a country if he/she has established that he/she would be subjected to extreme abuse. We, as a country, agreed to this standard after WW2. So did almost all other countries. It is the law. I don't know if/why he was released after his case was done. The Trump administration is correct in trying to find alternative countries to accept these aliens who can't (for legal or practical reasons) be sent back to their native country. None of that changes the fact that this deportation was against the law. It was a "mistake" as the White House admits, but it was also a mistake that resulted in a violation of the law. He should be brought back, not to be set free, but to be held in detention until some other country agrees to take him. His wife and kid can join him there. I have a rather quaint (these days) belief that our government should follow the laws it has enacted. How does a judge rule that a known gang member from another country has the right to stay in the US? Why does he get protection from returning to his country of origin? how evil do you have to be to defend the violent criminals right to avoid being held accountable by the people they violated? The last question is not to you Frankish I understand your point.
BillsFanNC Posted April 2 Author Posted April 2 He was allowed to come in and remain here illegally, along with millions of others. But it's the clerical snafu "illegality" that should really be your concern here. Nope. Deport. Don't look back.
JFKjr Posted April 2 Posted April 2 7 hours ago, Roundybout said: Except this guys wasn’t a gang member. And if they can deport him for no reason or due process, they sure as hell could deport you or me. Sounds like they have plenty of evidence he WAS. Not only that, a leader. And on top of that, a human trafficker.
BillsFanNC Posted April 2 Author Posted April 2 Those illegals taking over apartments in Aurora aren't Tren de Aragua!! This guy isn't MS-13!! Maybe sit this one out Roundy the Gang Apologist.
Roundybout Posted April 2 Posted April 2 44 minutes ago, JFKjr said: Sounds like they have plenty of evidence he WAS. Not only that, a leader. And on top of that, a human trafficker. They have none. Why did Trump ignore a court order of protection?
Recommended Posts