Merged Due process in the US

[Chris_Halkides]

In his book Guantanamo and the Abuse of Presidential Power Joseph Margulies wrote about Habeas Corpus (p.46), "For centuries it has protected foreign nationals as well as U.S. citizens." His discussion covers several pages, and for those of us who wish to get some background on the subject, it is a good place to start.

 

[Norman Alexander]

You still aren't getting it. There is NO need for TRIAL or CONVICTION under the constitution or federal law. Capiche?

There is a need for due process. That means some sort of "day in court". Otherwise you can deport people simply on the basis that the US Gestapo don't like the cut of your jib, or that you squinted at them funny. Or that you said something to displease Dear Leader.

And now they want to include US citizens under that umbrella. One of those people might be you.

So if you suddenly find yourself snatched in a supermarket one morning because your T-shirt says "Truck Fump" or something, and deported without any recourse to a Central American hell-hole, you might want to reconsider what you just posted above.

 

[bruto]

The tatoos are not Photoshop, just the "MS13".

Think about that a moment. If the tattoos were sufficient, why was it necessary to photoshop more? How does this differ from other disqualifying corruptions? If the cops plant evidence, it's a crime even if the suspect in question is guilty. How does this differ?

 

[stanfr]

There is a need for due process. That means some sort of "day in court". Otherwise you can deport people simply on the basis that the US Gestapo don't like the cut of your jib, or that you squinted at them funny. Or that you said something to displease Dear Leader.

And now they want to include US citizens under that umbrella. One of those people might be you.

So if you suddenly find yourself snatched in a supermarket one morning because your T-shirt says "Truck Fump" or something, and deported without any recourse to a Central American hell-hole, you might want to reconsider what you just posted above.

No need to reconsider what I jut posted because it is in no way is in conflict with what you just stated here, which I agree with 100%, and why I think Trump is insanely dangerous. What I said is that DP does not require a trial or conviction in this circumstance. That is not my opinion--it is a simple fact. So when you said something that is non-factual, I pointed it out. Precise language is important when dealing with legal issues. Period.

 

[stanfr]

Think about that a moment. If the tattoos were sufficient, why was it necessary to photoshop more? How does this differ from other disqualifying corruptions? If the cops plant evidence, it's a crime even if the suspect in question is guilty. How does this differ?

It absolutely was stupid, and disgraceful, but it 'differs' in that this in not being offered in a courtroom, this was presented for the court of public opinion, by an insane administration looking to justify their unconstitutional actions. So, it was not "illegal" per se in that it did not violate any specific law. Like so many of Trump's unethical actions, it was done with plausible deniability, he can claim he was just presenting evidence handed to him (that's always his 'out') and it was meant to clarify to the masses why he is behaving like a dictator.

 

[stanfr]

Incidentally, to clarify what might not be apparent to some of you--
Trump and his cronies absolutely know that this is a losing issue for him. Even Joe Rogan and Candace Owens have pointed out the lunacy of his actions. They absolutely know that if Garcia is brought back, they most likely will lose both in the court of public opinion and in any court of law--barring some clear cut evidence that Garcia was engaged in criminal activity (and we haven't even seen rumors of that--other than the totally baseless claim that he was engaged in human trafficking).
That is precisely why he is doubling and tripling down on his edict that Garcia will never be returned. And he is relying on his fellow lunatic in El Salvador to take the blame for it. As a malignant narcissist he is 100% incapable of admitting a mistake, even if 100 legal scholars explained to him that he is tearing up the constitution.
So it really will come down to the SCOTUS--how far will they be willing to go to pressure Trump to follow the Constitution? That remains to be seen.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

Don't blame me. I didn't vote for anyone.

Uh, that means you are very much to blame. 'All that is needed for the victory of evil is for good men to do nothing".

I'm a good man for sure but my vote (as far as you're concerned) would be illegal.

 

[Norman Alexander]

No need to reconsider what I jut posted because it is in no way is in conflict with what you just stated here, which I agree with 100%, and why I think Trump is insanely dangerous. What I said is that DP does not require a trial or conviction in this circumstance. That is not my opinion--it is a simple fact. So when you said something that is non-factual, I pointed it out. Precise language is important when dealing with legal issues. Period.

I understand. The very reason there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of "illegals" in the USA is they are waiting on an immigration court decision on their status. They are waiting so long, years often, because there are not enough courts to process them in a reasonable time. Certainly, not all of them get favourable decisions. Even the commies Obama and Biden were sending back tens of thousands per month who the courts said "No" to.

So if Trump wanted to ease the "illegals" situation, the very best way would be to create more immigration courts working faster through the backlog. If the processing delay was reduced to, say, under 50 days then there would have been a legal and binding decision for Garcia that he has not had yet. Would be great PR for Trump too, "dealing with the illegals quicker" by legitimate means, rather than unconstitutionally deeming them terrorists and incarcerating them in a Salvadoran Kiss of the Spider Woman.

 

[jimbob]

Garcia could be the late, great Alphonse Capone combined with Eddy "Scissorhands" Kruger and Jack the Ripper, with a touch of child-molester thrown in. But he still needs to be returned to the USA to receive proper justice through legal channels. Only after he is properly and lawfully convicted in a US court of law does his status as a resident and any proven gang membership come into the picture. If the Trump goons had done that first, Garcia probably wouldn't even have made the news.

Well put

 

[jimbob]

You still aren't getting it. There is NO need for TRIAL or CONVICTION under the constitution or federal law. Capiche?

There's still a need for due process for people who are not citizens

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

 

[Darat]

No disagreement with that--I certainly have issues "believing" he was/is a gangster. I'm certainly not convinced, but I recognize some suspicious facts. So did a judge who found that he had ties to MS-13 based on "credible" testimony from an informant. Get him back here, that I am totally in favor of, even the stupid Trump administration initially admitted he was deported by "mistake"
My only issue was with people who supposedly are open-minded and consider evidence without bias saying he obviously doesn't have ties to a gang, I don't think the allegations are ludicrous, but maybe have a hearing on it or something, like I dunno--due process??

But there is evidence that some of the claims about tattoos and gang memberships are pulled from someone's backside. For example the photo of a UK bloke's arm tattoo that is a predominantly a clock with the hands set at the time of his daughter's birth and her date of birth under that appears in USA documents about gang tattoos. I'd say the evidence is that the USA government's claims about gang tattoos needs more than its assertions.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

But there is evidence that some of the claims about tattoos and gang memberships are pulled from someone's backside. For example the photo of a UK bloke's arm tattoo that is a predominantly a clock with the hands set at the time of his daughter's birth and her date of birth under that appears in USA documents about gang tattoos. I'd say the evidence is that the USA government's claims about gang tattoos needs more than its assertions.

Aren't tattoos an indication ..... but not proof?

 

[jimbob]

Aren't tattoos an indication ..... but not proof?

Not even that, given the publicised errors false claims, that the administration has made around tatoos - the most blatant being the example Darat gave.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

Not even that, given the publicised errors false claims, that the administration has made around tatoos - the most blatant being the example Darat gave.

I guess it depends upon what time is featured on the clock and if it's similar to a known gang-member tattoo. A Yugoslav hair dresser straight across the street from me has a tattoo on her shoulders (very similar to the one pictured below). I don't know if she is a gang member or an ex con but I definitly will not let her cut my hair.

 

[The Don]

I understand. The very reason there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of "illegals" in the USA is they are waiting on an immigration court decision on their status. They are waiting so long, years often, because there are not enough courts to process them in a reasonable time. Certainly, not all of them get favourable decisions. Even the commies Obama and Biden were sending back tens of thousands per month who the courts said "No" to.

So if Trump wanted to ease the "illegals" situation, the very best way would be to create more immigration courts working faster through the backlog. If the processing delay was reduced to, say, under 50 days then there would have been a legal and binding decision for Garcia that he has not had yet. Would be great PR for Trump too, "dealing with the illegals quicker" by legitimate means, rather than unconstitutionally deeming them terrorists and incarcerating them in a Salvadoran Kiss of the Spider Woman.

The Republicans have no interest in "solving" the illegal immigration "problem".

Illegal immigrants provide a large, cheap, and easily cowed workforce who are prepared to do jobs at a cost that legal immigrants refuse to work at - companies love this.

Illegal immigrants provide a useful bogeyman to whip up fear and hate, the Republicans' main recruiting tools. If they didn't have illegal immigrants they'd have to find a different out group to persecute.

Doing performatively cruel things to illegal immigrants makes Republicans look strong and powerful to their supporters. Without illegal immigrants they'd have to be cruel to a different group.

If there was a button to magically get rid of all illegal immigrants permanently, IMO the Republicans would have no interest in pressing it because illegal immigrants are too useful.

 

[The Don]

I guess it depends upon what time is featured on the clock and if it's similar to a known gang-member tattoo.

Nope

 

[Planigale]

It sounds like the current US government it taking further action to reduce free speech. Initially to prevent expressions of opposition to those opposed to the actions of the current Israeli government (under the guise that anti-Israeli government opinions are anti-semitic). But this could easily extend to restricting expression of other opinions contrary to US government policy.

The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world's largest public funder of medical and biological research, released a draft policy early Tuesday that would bar universities from receiving grants if they participate in boycotts of Israeli companies or operate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs.....Under the new draft guidelines, institutions seeking funding would have to certify that they do not support boycotts of Israel or companies operating there and do not run DEI or DEIA (diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility) initiatives on campus. Those found in violation could lose their funding and be forced to repay grants already awarded.....For example, institutions where faculty members or professional associations support BDS may fall under this classification. So might campuses that avoid partnerships with Israeli universities or divest from companies linked to Israeli operations.
Even actions taken by student governments or internal committees could trigger disqualification, as indirect connections may be deemed sufficient under the new policy.
According to U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration, the mere presence of anti-Israel campaigns on campus — or a university administration's failure to clearly denounce them — may be seen as active participation in boycott initiatives.

U.S. moves to cut medical research funding for universities supporting BDS

NIH’s draft policy bars $48 billion in annual grants for schools boycotting Israeli entities or maintaining DEI programs—triggering funding freezes at Harvard, Columbia and others

www.ynetnews.com

 

[Clutch Cargo]

I guess it depends upon what time is featured on the clock and if it's similar to a known gang-member tattoo.

Nope

It may not matter to you but it matters to me. I don't ignore my prejudices, I nurture them.

 

[Norman Alexander]

The Republicans have no interest in "solving" the illegal immigration "problem".

Illegal immigrants provide a large, cheap, and easily cowed workforce who are prepared to do jobs at a cost that legal immigrants refuse to work at - companies love this.

Illegal immigrants provide a useful bogeyman to whip up fear and hate, the Republicans' main recruiting tools. If they didn't have illegal immigrants they'd have to find a different out group to persecute.

Doing performatively cruel things to illegal immigrants makes Republicans look strong and powerful to their supporters. Without illegal immigrants they'd have to be cruel to a different group.

If there was a button to magically get rid of all illegal immigrants permanently, IMO the Republicans would have no interest in pressing it because illegal immigrants are too useful.

Indeed, the obvious corollary to my comment.

 

[turingtest]

Think about that a moment. If the tattoos were sufficient, why was it necessary to photoshop more? How does this differ from other disqualifying corruptions? If the cops plant evidence, it's a crime even if the suspect in question is guilty. How does this differ?

It's like the Sharpie-assisted map that showed a hurricane possibly going in a direction Trump had said it might go in, but for which there was no other evidence- it's not about the thing itself, it's about squelching the idea that he might have made a mistake.