• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Due process in the US

Senator Chris Van Hollen
just met with El Salvador's Vice President Félix Ulloa, and get this...

The VP told Van Hollen that the reason they are holding Kilmar Abrego Garcia at CECOT is because the Trump administration is paying them to do so.

They also provided no evidence that Abrego Garcia is part of MS-13 or committed any crimes, just like the US government has not been able to do.

Trump is literally colluding with El Salvador to violate a Supreme Court order, and Republicans are silent!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1912572886054731939
 
Andy_Ross said:
Senator Chris Van Hollen
just met with El Salvador's Vice President Félix Ulloa, and get this...

The VP told Van Hollen that the reason they are holding Kilmar Abrego Garcia at CECOT is because the Trump administration is paying them to do so.

They also provided no evidence that Abrego Garcia is part of MS-13 or committed any crimes, just like the US government has not been able to do.

Trump is literally colluding with El Salvador to violate a Supreme Court order, and Republicans are silent!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1912572886054731939
Click to expand...
Axios reported that he was denied visitation with Garcia.

I wonder why?
 
Hercules56 said:
A non-citizen can be grabbed by ICE. ICE cannot grab a US citizen. State police and other authorities would step in if they tried such a thing. And if by some crazy chance a citizen was accidentally deported, the US State Department and embassy will have his back.
Click to expand...
I did not ask about ICE, a rogue outfit. I asked about the constitution.
 
Skeptical Greg said:
What reason would ICE have to be investigating the person we are discussing?
Click to expand...
. . . Potentially adverse policy consequences.
Click to expand...
In other words, protests they don't like.

ETA: NYT article for context.

The Trump administration is seeking to deport a Columbia student because his activities could “potentially undermine” the Middle East peace process, according to a memo from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that was reviewed by The New York Times.
Click to expand...
The student, Mohsen Mahdawi, 34, is a legal permanent resident who has spent a decade in the United States. Until this week, he had been in hiding, for fear that the administration would seek to deport him after he led pro-Palestinian demonstrations at the school. But on Monday he showed up at an immigration services center in Vermont, expecting to take the test that would allow him to become a naturalized citizen.

Instead, he was detained by Department of Homeland Security agents, who relied on Mr. Rubio’s memo as the justification for the arrest. Mr. Rubio cited the same law that has been used to justify the detention of Mr. Mahdawi’s fellow Columbia protester, Mahmoud Khalil.

The law, which Mr. Khalil’s lawyers have challenged in federal court, allows Mr. Rubio to initiate deportation proceedings against anyone whose presence in the United States can reasonably be considered to hurt American foreign policy goals.



Last week, an immigration judge found that Mr. Rubio’s memo alone allowed the Trump administration to meet the burden of proof necessary for deporting Mr. Khalil, whom the secretary accused of undermining the fight against antisemitism. The judge’s decision affirmed, for the time being, Mr. Rubio’s power to pick and choose which noncitizens — even those with legal residency — can be deported.

Evidence submitted by the Department of Homeland Security and reviewed by The Times did not include any allegations of antisemitism against Mr. Khalil himself, apart from the flat declaration in Mr. Rubio’s memo.

Mr. Khalil’s detention created an uproar, and his lawyers had already begun to mount constitutional challenges on behalf of their client by March 15, when Mr. Rubio’s memo concerning Mr. Mahdawi was issued.

Like Mr. Khalil, Mr. Mahdawi stands accused of undermining the U.S. foreign policy goal of halting antisemitism. But Mr. Rubio’s memo concerning Mr. Mahdahwi is different in several respects and more specific.

The memo asserted, without elaboration, that protests of the type Mr. Mahdawi had led could undermine the Middle East peace process by reinforcing antisemitic sentiment in the region and around the world and ultimately threatening a U.S. foreign policy goal of resolving the Gaza conflict “peacefully.”

​

Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Tero said:
OK, quote where in the consitution a tourist is a lesser person than a citizen. I believe the word person covers tourist.
Click to expand...


Being detained pending possible deportation is not a criminal matter.

If a tourist is detained for a Visa violation, the issue does not go to criminal court. It goes to an immigration judge.
 
theprestige said:
A citizen can't be exiled.
Click to expand...
YOUR President, is looking to change that. He can find some loophole, some discrepancy in someone's naturalization application to justify making their citizenship null & void, and then deporting them for supporting peace in Gaza, or Gay rights in Russia, etc.
 
Hercules56 said:
I am not arguing against Due Process for migrants, legal or illegal.
Click to expand...
You’re claiming that the entitlement to due process should vary according to criteria. That’s wrong per se. But you are also mentioning things like manner of arrival that you say should be part of those criteria. This is specifically wrong. It also happens to be Trump administration argument.
 
Hercules56 said:
You have ZERO opinion about the President of the United States saying he supports the idea of deporting US citizens to foreign prisons that are notorious for violence and zero Due Process?

Interesting. Kinda sound like the "Good German" philosophy of 80 years ago.

:(
Click to expand...
It's a figure of speech. A term of art, even. I'm not interested in your desire to pick a fight with whoever seems likely. I'm not your dancing monkey.

You embraced a stupid and wrong idea, because it matched your ignorant preconceptions. And when I corrected you, did you admit error? Did you apologize for your aggressive responses when you were in the wrong?

No. You ignored your unforced error, and tried to bait me into some other fight you hoped you'd have a better chance of winning. Why should I play along with nonsense like that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom