WELCOME TO RIVER DAVES PLACE

The Black Robe Cartel

regor

regor

Tormenting libturds
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
45,653
Reaction score
156,978
530RL said:
It’s Trump appointed judges too.

Trump-appointed judge says president’s use of Alien Enemies Act is unlawful in first-of-its-kind ruling

A Donald Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas ruled that the president unlawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act and blocked the administration from quickly deporting some alleged members of a Venezuelan gang.
www.yahoo.com

It would appear everyone is corrupt and a traitor, except of course those who blindly follow your messiah.
Click to expand...

The SC legitimacy is going down and we’re going to help them if they’d like, just like yore fake news scumbags. Took yore party and now we destroy yore easy money scam!!! 🤣

IMG_2090.png


The ass kicking will continue lil two-faced traitor.
 
monkeyswrench

monkeyswrench

To The Rescue!
Joined
Sep 7, 2018
Messages
31,401
Reaction score
91,376
Funny that a Federal Judge would quote Tocqueville. Most Americans couldn't care less about a frenchman's view of American society. He preached democracy in his works, glossing over the checks put forth by the Founders. Though it is translated and known in PoliSci classes as "Democracy in America", it is actually recorded as "De la démocratie en Amérique". Simply a book written by a frenchman, who'd lied to his peers and to the Americans he worked with. He claimed he was traveling to research American law and punishment, and used that as a way to investigate government and citizenry across the new country.
 
R

rcmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
8,772
I read through this bullshit far enough to read that this judge believes that even though Perkins Cole hired Fusion GPS to hire Christopher Steele to hire Igor Danchenko to write rumors of pee pee tapes, any suggestion alleging they conspired to weave a false narrative that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia, including by falsifying evidence, deceiving law enforcement, and exploiting access to highly sensitive data sources was without merit. Trump and his attorneys were also sanctioned, for bringing frivolous lawsuits, by these same judges, even though the person who provided the narrative for this entire shit show, Danchenko himself admitting to the FBI in January 2017 that corroboration for key dossier claims was "zero."


This judge is also saying the Sussmann, who was convicted of altering evidence that was presented to the FISA courts, (the altering was by taking the phrase "Papadapoulis has no ties to Russian intelligence" and changing it to read "Papadapoulis has ties to Russian intelligence") is instead somehow innocent of all charges, and never got probation for lying to a FISA court, which led to the FBI and NSA spying on the Trump campaign and later the Trump administration. And of course, I am no lawyer, but I am pretty sure that lying under oath in an affadavit to a panel of judges is something that would be a pretty serious crime for an officer of the court..

Anyway, just reading this judges statement of where they are starting from in the facts says that this judge is not starting from reality, is living in a political bubble where somehow Rachel Maddow is right center, and the rest of this order is going to be complete trash. Trump should ignore this order while appealing this to the Supreme Court.
 
t&y

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
16,852
Reaction score
32,216
I'm thinking large camps in the desert with nothing but canvas tents, steel bunk beds, and some outdated MRE's for daily nutrition.

You simply ask them, you want to live here for a bit, or get the fuck out right now?
 
R

rcmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
8,772
When Gavin says they can't be arrested in California, that makes them legal?
 
530RL

530RL

"The Oracle"
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
23,562
Reaction score
22,867
rcmike said:
When Gavin says they can't be arrested in California, that makes them legal?
Click to expand...
Nope, immigration is a federal matter.

They became legal when the US government flew them here and gave them legal status. They never came here illegally according to miller’s factual statement of how they arrived.
 
R

rcmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
8,772
I believe the correct term is "temporary protected status"

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is a temporary measure, granted by the U.S. President, that protects individuals from deportation and grants them work authorization due to extraordinary conditions in their home country, such as armed conflict or natural disaster. TPS is a humanitarian designation that allows eligible nationals of certain countries to remain in the United States temporarily.

Elaboration:
    • Temporary Nature:
      TPS is not a permanent solution to immigration issues. It is designed to provide temporary relief to individuals who cannot safely return to their home country due to extraordinary circumstances.
    • Presidential Authority:
      The President of the United States has the authority to designate countries for TPS when conditions prevent their nationals from returning safely.
 
530RL

530RL

"The Oracle"
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
23,562
Reaction score
22,867
t&y said:
Are you now trying to say all the imports under Biden should be considered legal U.S. Citizens?
Click to expand...
Nope. It would be fact specific.

The facts as outlined by the Trump administration is that these individuals were brought in by the government with temporary legal status. These are not individuals who entered illegally and have committed crimes. They are individuals admitted legally and are working with green cards.

It seems reasonable to me that absent a legal revocation of that status, the decision to call them illegals is simply a lie by the administration. 🤷

But I understand the administration and its supporters are not highly concerned about facts, the rule of law, nor honesty. It is unfortunate that they can not tell the difference.
 
SNiC Jet

SNiC Jet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
9,272
Reaction score
29,484
530RL said:
These are not individuals who entered illegally and have committed crimes......
Click to expand...

Speaking of facts.... you know this ^^^^ how? Oh, never mind ....it's obvious this is just more of your fabricated bullshit. :cool:
 
t&y

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
16,852
Reaction score
32,216
530RL said:
Nope. It would be fact specific.

The facts as outlined by the Trump administration is that these individuals were brought in by the government with temporary legal status. These are not individuals who entered illegally and have committed crimes. They are individuals admitted legally and are working with green cards.
Click to expand...
Hmm Do they have inalienable rights to citizenship if they were granted legal access to the country?

530RL said:
It seems reasonable to me that absent a legal revocation of that status, the decision to call them illegals is simply a lie by the administration. 🤷

But I understand the administration and its supporters are not highly concerned about facts, the rule of law, nor honesty. It is unfortunate that they can not tell the difference.
Click to expand...
And you believe that ICE is currently picking random people here legally to deport? Or could it be they are working off the same lists of illegal immigrants that the prior administrations had but refused to act on?
 
R

rcmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
8,772
All of this is a lie by our buddy MS53

They were never granted legal status. They were granted a temporary pause in deportation.

This does not grant them legal status. It simply means until the president decides conditions have changed in their home countries, they will not be deported.
 
regor

regor

Tormenting libturds
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
45,653
Reaction score
156,978
530RL said:
Nope. It would be fact specific.

The facts as outlined by the Trump administration is that these individuals were brought in by the government with temporary legal status. These are not individuals who entered illegally and have committed crimes. They are individuals admitted legally and are working with green cards.

It seems reasonable to me that absent a legal revocation of that status, the decision to call them illegals is simply a lie by the administration. 🤷

But I understand the administration and its supporters are not highly concerned about facts, the rule of law, nor honesty. It is unfortunate that they can not tell the difference.
Click to expand...

Someone’s getting desperate……. 🤣

IMG_2066.jpeg
 
530RL

530RL

"The Oracle"
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
23,562
Reaction score
22,867
rcmike said:
All of this is a lie by our buddy MS53

They were never granted legal status. They were granted a temporary pause in deportation.

This does not grant them legal status. It simply means until the president decides conditions have changed in their home countries, they will not be deported.
Click to expand...
LOL

I like that pitch. According to your view, a visa is not a legal entry into a country, it is simply a “temporary pause in deportation”.

SNiC Jet said:
Speaking of facts.... you know this ^^^^ how? Oh, never mind ....it's obvious this is just more of your fabricated bullshit. :cool:
Click to expand...
I know the first part based upon the tweet by Mr Miller which states “These are illegal aliens Biden flew by airplane to the United States.” If the US government flies them in with protected status and a green card, they did not come here illegally. They came here legally.

I presume the second part as all persons present in the US are deemed innocent until proven guilty under the US constitution as well as if they were convicted criminals, the temporary protected status is revoked by law.
 
Last edited:
R

rcmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
8,772
530RL said:
LOL

I like that pitch. According to your view, a visa is not a legal entry into a country, it is simply a “temporary pause in deportation”.


I know the first part based upon the tweet by Mr Miller which states “These are illegal aliens Biden flew by airplane to the United States.” If the US government flies them in with protected status and a green card, they did not come here illegally. They came here legally.

I presume the second part as all persons present in the US are deemed innocent until proven guilty under the US constitution as well as if they were convicted criminals, the temporary protected status is revoked by law.
Click to expand...
A visa is not a legal entry. A visa itself does not guarantee entry; it only indicates that a consular officer has determined the individual is eligible to seek entry for a specific purpose. The legal status granted upon entering the U.S. depends on the type of visa and the conditions set by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers at the port of entry.

Just an FYI, the CBP determines at the port of entry how long you can come in, what you can do when you get here, where you can stay, what will mean you gotta go, and anything else they determine during your interview at the port of entry.

For the Haitians, as I understand it, they were not granted visas. They were picked up and flown to the US where they were granted entry, protected status, and a work authorization. That probably included a SSN as well.


Reading more about this, just to try to be accurate, I was correct, no visa.


Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is not a visa; it is a temporary immigration status granted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to eligible nationals of designated countries who are already in the United States and cannot safely return to their home country due to extraordinary conditions, such as armed conflict, environmental disasters, or other crises. Therefore, when the Biden administration granted or extended TPS to Haitians and Venezuelans, they did not receive a visa but were instead granted TPS, which provides protection from deportation and eligibility to apply for work authorization (Employment Authorization Document, or EAD) and, in some cases, travel authorization.
Details on TPS for Haitians and Venezuelans Under Biden
Haitians
  • Biden Administration Actions:
    • In June 2024, the Biden administration extended and redesignated TPS for Haiti, making approximately 309,000 Haitians who were in the U.S. on or before June 3, 2024, eligible for TPS. This status was extended through February 3, 2026.
    • Previously, TPS had been designated for Haitians following the 2010 earthquake and was extended multiple times, covering an estimated 520,694 Haitians by July 2024.
  • Legal Status Granted:
    • TPS holders are protected from deportation and can apply for an EAD to work legally in the U.S.
    • They may also request travel authorization (Advance Parole) to leave and return to the U.S. under certain conditions.
    • TPS is not a visa and does not provide a path to permanent residency or citizenship, but it allows lawful presence in the U.S. during the designated period.
Venezuelans
  • Biden Administration Actions:
    • In 2021, the Biden administration designated TPS for Venezuelans who were in the U.S. on or before March 9, 2021, due to political and economic crises in Venezuela.
    • In September 2023, TPS was redesignated for Venezuelans who arrived in the U.S. on or before July 31, 2023, covering an estimated 600,000 individuals. This was extended through October 2026 under the Biden administration.
    • In March 2025, a federal judge ordered the continuation of TPS for Venezuelans despite attempts by the Trump administration to terminate it, pending further legal proceedings.
  • Legal Status Granted:
    • Similar to Haitians, Venezuelans with TPS are protected from deportation and can apply for an EAD to work legally.
    • They may also seek travel authorization.
    • Like Haitian TPS, this status is temporary and does not lead to permanent residency or citizenship.

How this lead to Biden putting people on airplanes and flying here is murky at best, but seems to have been that Mayorkis decided he would rather that Haitians not be subjected to the dangers of getting to the mainland then having to cross the border illegally, so he claimed that flying them to the US was in the public interest. Once here, and parolled into the US, they could be given TPS. The only requirement was that they claim to know someone who was already here. Again, they were not granted a visa, they were simply flown in, dumped, then told they were now temporarily protected from deportation.


That's not really my opinion, that is what DHS, ICE, CBP, and Department of State say. And the primary question here, is since the President of the USA designates the temporary protected status, when the President of the USA decides to end that TPS, how can a judge decide that the President of the USA is not allowed to end the designation that he is legally the one charged with determining?
 
monkeyswrench

monkeyswrench

To The Rescue!
Joined
Sep 7, 2018
Messages
31,401
Reaction score
91,376
So Biden flew in Haitian and Venezuelan immigrants, in relatively large numbers, but didn't try near as hard for Afghans that supported our soldiers? Seems about wrong to me.
 
R

rcmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
8,772
monkeyswrench said:
So Biden flew in Haitian and Venezuelan immigrants, in relatively large numbers, but didn't try near as hard for Afghans that supported our soldiers? Seems about wrong to me.
Click to expand...
He flew thousands in, but he did not care if they were the ones that supported us or not.

Frankly we got really lucky they did not take down a plane.
 
AzMandella

AzMandella

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2007
Messages
920
Reaction score
2,344
530RL said:
LOL

I like that pitch. According to your view, a visa is not a legal entry into a country, it is simply a “temporary pause in deportation”.


I know the first part based upon the tweet by Mr Miller which states “These are illegal aliens Biden flew by airplane to the United States.” If the US government flies them in with protected status and a green card, they did not come here illegally. They came here legally.

I presume the second part as all persons present in the US are deemed innocent until proven guilty under the US constitution as well as if they were convicted criminals, the temporary protected status is revoked by law.
Click to expand...
Just curious here . If they came in on an executive order by one President why can't the next President send them back using an executive order ?
 
530RL

530RL

"The Oracle"
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
23,562
Reaction score
22,867
AzMandella said:
Just curious here . If they came in on an executive order by one President why can't the next President send them back using an executive order ?
Click to expand...
He absolutely can as long as they are done in a way that complies with the law.

With the exception of the loonies, no one is arguing a President shouldn’t have broad authority to implement policies as they see fit, they are arguing that such implementation must be done consistent with the law that applies to all presidents.

Unfortunately as the President laid out in his last interview, he is “not sure” if he has to comply with the constitution, the laws, of the United States.

As a result, objectively he has been losing case after case as he attempts to accomplish things which are probably well intentioned, but done outside of the boundaries of our laws.

What this really boils down to is that some believe the ends justify the means even if illegal, while others, judges included, think the constitution and rule of law are important guardrails to protect the populous from the government.
 
Last edited:
Smitty7

Smitty7

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2022
Messages
1,653
Reaction score
4,587
🥼 Your ride is here . Go with the men in the nice white coats .
 
t&y

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
16,852
Reaction score
32,216
R

rcmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
8,772
If Trump decides to resettle the 12k people, unless he puts them all in this particular judge's house, in direct violation of the 3rd amendment, then we are lost. When judges decide that they can rewrite the constitution however their politics demand, then it is the duty of the President to defend that constitution and fight those judges.

This order, like so many others in the last 5 months, makes a mockery of the constitution, and separation of powers. This judge has NO responsibility or authority in the execution of foreign policy, including immigration. Fuck him.
 
was thatguy

was thatguy

living in a cage of fear
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,850
Reaction score
104,005
530RL said:
He absolutely can as long as they are done in a way that complies with the law.

With the exception of the loonies, no one is arguing a President shouldn’t have broad authority to implement policies as they see fit, they are arguing that such implementation must be done consistent with the law that applies to all presidents.

Unfortunately as the President laid out in his last interview, he is “not sure” if he has to comply with the constitution, the laws, of the United States.

As a result, objectively he has been losing case after case as he attempts to accomplish things which are probably well intentioned, but done outside of the boundaries of our laws.

What this really boils down to is that some believe the ends justify the means even if illegal, while others, judges included, think the constitution and rule of law are important guardrails to protect the populous from the government.
Click to expand...
IMG_1896.gif
 
regor

regor

Tormenting libturds
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
45,653
Reaction score
156,978
monkeyswrench

monkeyswrench

To The Rescue!
Joined
Sep 7, 2018
Messages
31,401
Reaction score
91,376
regor said:

A federal judge in San Francisco has temporarily blocked the Trump administration's sweeping overhaul of the federal government.

"To make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies," she wrote in her ruling Friday evening, "any president must enlist the help of his co-equal branch and partner, the Congress." 🤣


View attachment 1505063
Click to expand...
Funny, the judicial branch seems to be calling the shots with no enlisted help from the legislative or the administrative branches...
 
regor

regor

Tormenting libturds
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
45,653
Reaction score
156,978

Supreme Court Set To End Era Of Nationwide Judicial Injunctions​

teaser image
The days of rogue district court judges hijacking executive authority may finally be numbered...

WED MAY 14, AT 1:20 PM


Now, the left is panicking.

Without these judicial shortcuts, they’ll have to argue their cases on the merits instead of in front of cherry-picked friendly judges. Even Vox admitted these injunctions were “the core of the resistance.”

But that era may be ending.

The Supreme Court looks poised to rein in this abuse of power and restore constitutional balance.

For anyone who believes in law, not lawfare, this moment can’t come soon enough.


Do the right thing Justices or you'll suffer the same fate as the MSM fake news..................... 🖕
 
regor

regor

Tormenting libturds
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
45,653
Reaction score
156,978
Attorneys for Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan argue in their motion that her conduct on the day in question amounted to directing people’s movement in and around her courtroom, and that she enjoys legal immunity for official acts she performs as a judge. They cite last year’s US Supreme Court ruling in President Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case that found that former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and are presumptively entitled to immunity for all official acts.


“The problems with the prosecution are legion, but most immediately, the government cannot prosecute Judge Dugan because she is entitled to judicial immunity for her official acts,” the motion says. “Immunity is not a defense to the prosecution to be determined later by a jury or court; it is an absolute bar to the prosecution at the outset.”


1747259413579.png



"Judicial Immunity" 🤣
 
R

rcmike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
8,772
regor said:
Attorneys for Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan argue in their motion that her conduct on the day in question amounted to directing people’s movement in and around her courtroom, and that she enjoys legal immunity for official acts she performs as a judge. They cite last year’s US Supreme Court ruling in President Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case that found that former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and are presumptively entitled to immunity for all official acts.


“The problems with the prosecution are legion, but most immediately, the government cannot prosecute Judge Dugan because she is entitled to judicial immunity for her official acts,” the motion says. “Immunity is not a defense to the prosecution to be determined later by a jury or court; it is an absolute bar to the prosecution at the outset.”


View attachment 1506278


"Judicial Immunity" 🤣
Click to expand...
We can laugh at this, but they have it. What will need to be proven in this case is that attempting to assist illegal aliens avoid due process of law by aiding them in an attempt to flee apprehension is not an official act.

This is the same complete immunity that protects prosecutors who engage in malicious prosecution (coughJ6), and similar to the qualified immunity that protects police who pretend they did not know any better when they trample constitutional rights..
 
regor

regor

Tormenting libturds
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
45,653
Reaction score
156,978
rcmike said:
We can laugh at this, but they have it. What will need to be proven in this case is that attempting to assist illegal aliens avoid due process of law by aiding them in an attempt to flee apprehension is not an official act.

This is the same complete immunity that protects prosecutors who engage in malicious prosecution (coughJ6), and similar to the qualified immunity that protects police who pretend they did not know any better when they trample constitutional rights..
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure what she did was not an official act. If it is.......................
 
W

wzuber

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
8,958
Reaction score
13,623
regor said:
Attorneys for Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan argue in their motion that her conduct on the day in question amounted to directing people’s movement in and around her courtroom, and that she enjoys legal immunity for official acts she performs as a judge. They cite last year’s US Supreme Court ruling in President Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case that found that former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and are presumptively entitled to immunity for all official acts.


“The problems with the prosecution are legion, but most immediately, the government cannot prosecute Judge Dugan because she is entitled to judicial immunity for her official acts,” the motion says. “Immunity is not a defense to the prosecution to be determined later by a jury or court; it is an absolute bar to the prosecution at the outset.”


View attachment 1506278


"Judicial Immunity" 🤣
Click to expand...
Good lord that's one ugly dude.
They are desperate fools franticly trying to save their asses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top