patrick.net

Misc says

They have been embedded into systems that are paid for by the taxpayers. Those that wanna work do, while also getting the benefits of a 1st world nation.

Most vacation back to the countries they are supposedly persecuted in.

Bingo. I pay for it. I'm sure most here do as well I think. Nothing about race or anything. When a US citizen has to get notarized documents to bring a family member in and out of the country that has a different skin color than me, illegals can get fucked. I don't get due process.

We get accused of trafficking my nephew domestically and internationally. It's a pain in the ass since my SIL is a dip shit. We have to drive an hour round trip to get notarized documents because she can't drive and mail it. We need the address of the hotel and the dates. So I have to draft a document anytime we travel with him. Where the hell is my due process and why the profiling of a white family with a black kid. Get fucked.

You're here illegally. Get the fuck out. I was handed a situation I didn't want but would do it for any of my nephews or nieces. I don't beat my wife. I'm sorry, but you won't get any sympathy about due process from me. Kick their asses out. If they made an accident, file forms and do what you have to and get back to the US. Prove you're a legal citizen. If you can't goodbye.

Misc says

However, in legalese the majority are in the country legally by claiming that they are seeking asylum

Many are.

Asylum is not a constitutional right. Its a law that was passed by congress because people wanted it that way. YOU may not like that we have asylum laws, but we do have them.

IF congress wants to change the laws, they can change it. But as long as the laws are what they are, we should follow them.

Do you think the administration should not follow laws it does not like?

Edit: Actually I should correct myself... Congress can change the asylum laws, but asylum is part of the UN conventions that we are signatories of... so whatever they change the laws to would still need to comply with UN conventions. Of course we can withdraw from the UN conventions if we want to. (I dont want to.)

WookieMan says

Honest answer please. You think this guy was good for American society? He wasn't a citizen. Move on from it dude.

I want immigration standards that exclude immigrants who have committed crimes either in our country or their home country. It is our right to do so and I agree with it.

And I think we should follow the laws we have, and follow due process to enforce them.

DeficitHawk says

Do you think the administration should not follow laws it does not like?

We have long passed from being a nation of laws. There has been a huge fraud committed against the people of the US. Most of these Millions upon millions of asylum requests are bogus. The court dates to finalize the seekers status are literally 10 years into the future. The previous administration did that knowingly and wittingly. The only way to keep this nation from turning into a shithole country like the illegals came from is to persecute them. Better the ones that are here illegally and for bogus reasons than subjecting the citizens of the US to the shit the migrants bring with them. If it takes putting a few 100k of them into a prison in El Salvador to get the rest to self-deport and for others not to come. I am for it.

@Patrick this thread disappeared from my list view after I pushed some key combo while viewing/commenting on it. I can still interact if I find a link/comment to this thread but am curious how it vanished from the Thread overview (main view).

Good argument by constitutional scholar for an invasion, hence habeas corpus is not applicable here: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/squatter-syndrome-how-inefficiencies-our-legal-system-are-making-mockery-our-immigration

@mell

The author of the thread, AmericanKulak, is on your ignore list. To unignore him, click your own icon, then "edit profile" in upper right, then at the bottom of that edit profile page, under "ignored users", click his name.

Justice for illegals is deportation.

Justice for Americans is deportation of illegals.

It is that simple.

Let’s not cry about due process. Let cry about the fact there are STILL way too many illegal aliens in this country. We need justice, now!

PeopleUnited says

Let’s not cry about due process.

So just accept that the ends justify the means? Do you agree to give this power to an administration you DONT support?

Don't be to quick to compromise your rights.

The power to instantly deport illegals? Yes.

DeficitHawk says

PeopleUnited says

Let’s not cry about due process.

So just accept that the ends justify the means? Do you agree to give this power to an administration you DONT support?

Don't be to quick to compromise your rights.

We're not in favor of giving up our rights, Just those rights granted to the illegals that were obtained fraudulently.

Patrick says

The power to instantly deport illegals? Yes.

The power declare someone 'illegal', and incarcerate them in a foreign gulag where they can not have the opportunity to contest their classification as illegal..

There is rarely any reasonable doubt as to whether a criminal alien is indeed a criminal alien.

If you were born here, you have a birth certificate and maybe a passport, a long paper and digital history as an American, and you speak English like an American.

Misc says

We're not in favor of giving up our rights, Just those rights granted to the illegals that were obtained fraudulently.

I get it. You don't think immigrants should have due process. I think they should. We dont agree.

I doubt i will convince you to agree with me. The supreme court agrees with me. I'll have to accept that as a consolation prize.

Patrick says

There is rarely any reasonable doubt as to whether a criminal alien is indeed a criminal alien.

If you were born here, you have a birth certificate and maybe a passport, a long paper and digital history as an American, and you speak like an American.

The whole point of having due process in our constitution is that we don't always trust the motives and diligence of the people doing the enforcement.. Due process is simply to have an outside party check the facts, and compare them to our laws. As you say, the facts themselves are typically not hard verify.

The constitution is meant to allow us to live with some reasonable confidence that our rights will be respected no matter if we trust the administration or not.

I don't trust the motives of the people complaining.

The goal of far-left extremists' newfound love of "due process" is:

- to get more far-left Congressional representation because the census counts criminal aliens in allocating representatives
- to get more illegal votes from criminal aliens, as proven by the shrill resistance to even basic citizenship checks on voters
- to keep fucking American workers by making them compete with the 3rd world for jobs on American soil

Patrick says

I don't trust the motives of the people complaining.

You don't have to trust my motives. You just have to comply with the laws and the constitution. Its why we have them.

DeficitHawk says

I doubt i will convince you to agree with me. The supreme court agrees with me. I'll have to accept that as a consolation prize.

You willing to have the illegals pay for the benefits that they fraudulently obtained or the costs born by US citizens?????

The 13th amendment doesn't outlaw slavery. It states when it is applicable. About 1/3 of the prison population is illegals. Make them pay for the costs of their incarceration and for victim restitution. For those whose asylum claims are denied, have them pay for all social benefits (section 8 housing, medicaid, and other welfare benefits. Then add in the costs for their children (about $1200 per month for schooling when transportation is included) and add in some societal costs because US citizens (Blacks mostly) have their kids in public schools where English isn't the primary language. They and their children can pay for all this through a period of slavery before getting kicked out of the country.

You up for that ???? or as I figure your Username is simply a fiction.

That way US corporations can compete against Chinese companies on price.

DeficitHawk says

The power declare someone 'illegal', and incarcerate them in a foreign gulag where they can not have the opportunity to contest their classification as illegal..

How about sending them back to their country of origin, their total inability to show ANYthing regarding legal residency or permission to be here prima fracie evidence. If they disagree, they can Zoom call into a hearing in the US from their country of origin.

I think being in the country for 14 or 17 years on a student visa and having completed NO degree while engaging in political activism, mysterious endless tuition funds, and connections with a foreign political group is evidence on it's own. Deport first, they can fight it from Amman, Jordan.

DeficitHawk says

So just accept that the ends justify the means? Do you agree to give this power to an administration you DONT support?

Yes and Yes.

I have no problem deporting people who can't prove they have ANY permission to be here at all. Not even a tourist stamp in a passport that was exceeded years ago, nothing. Again, we have the internet and people in 4th world countries have Smartphones and Democrats were fine with virtual hearings during COVID and still are today, not just for administrative hearing (which deportation hearings are) but CRIMINAL cases.

I have no problem with Democrats just deporting a foreign national who cannot show one iota of evidence they are legally here.

DeficitHawk says

You don't have to trust my motives. You just have to comply with the laws and the constitution. Its why we have them.

The motive is to keep illegals and overstays here by requiring hearings, many of which will be in urban blue areas, but even if they aren't, the sheer volume will de facto keep them here years longer due to the case load.

Nope, this is an Administrative Process, they are not accused of a crime.

We don't need to have a hearing before police can escort teenagers off the factory property, regardless of whether they had spray paint or not, and don't need to wait for a judge to agree they were trespassing. They don't even need to be charged or so much as detained AT ALL. Just escorted off the property.

Another example: You are stopped by the police and have no license, registration, or insurance documentation.

Your car can and will be impounded. Yes, you will get a hearing at a later date if the police are nice enough not to arrest you on the spot.

So, Illegals with no documentation can simply be sent back home and have their hearing via ZOOM.

Misc says

We're not in favor of giving up our rights, Just those rights granted to the illegals that were obtained fraudulently.

This is the main point. You are not allowed due process. If you file the paperwork for refugee status fine, but that's not the case. He went to court for a crime. Sorry but you're gone as a woman beater even if with the correct paperwork. Which I believe he didn't even have. He's the legit definition of an illegal immigrant criminal.

Two laws that in my book that should result in immediate removal. Also note, it's just removal to country of origin outside of Venzuela so far. You go home. Home is not your neighbors house uninvited. Someone sneaks into your house while you're on a one week vacation, do you let them stay? That's what you're arguing Deficit. So I have to live with this person for due process? Nope, get the hell out.

WookieMan says

Home is not your neighbors house uninvited. Someone sneaks into your house while you're on a one week vacation, do you let them stay? That's what you're arguing Deficit. So I have to live with this person for due process? Nope, get the hell out.

You'll have to accept him in your home until a judge orders that it is indeed your home about 3 months from now. All costs borne by you

DeficitHawk,

I hope you stick around, I appreciate that you answer all pertinent questions.

The courts concluded that he was an illegal alien, but you have pointed out they did not issue a deportation order. I am not at all familiar with immigration laws. Is a deportation order a mere technicality or are there some reasons for which an illegal might not be deported?

If a deportation order must follow after establishing an alien's ineligibility to stay, why was it not issued?

DeficitHawk says

The whole point of having due process in our constitution

They're not part of our constitution. They don't have rights. Unless they filled out proper paperwork, no due process is necessary. We are just moving them back home. Not harming them either.

We have processes to enter. I don't believe "Maryland Man" did anything. There's no due process needed if he cannot provide credentials/ID/paperwork. He took a risk, beat his lady and should leave.

yawaraf says

If a deportation order must follow after establishing an alien's ineligibility to stay, why was it not issued?

As you said he went to court and was deemed an illegal alien. We flew him back home at tax payer costs. What did this administration do wrong or illegal? He broke a couple of laws that we know of.

This isn't some guy that crossed the Rio and picks crops, goes home to his wife and kids and has a family. I don't have a problem really with those types, but they still broke our laws. They're not going to deport that type for now. Get the criminals out. They did. Kudos. Not sure why anyone would be against this. He's not an American citizen. And I don't care about international treaties. This is our country. I pay massive taxes. Get the shit out of here.

DeficitHawk says

You just have to comply with the laws and the constitution. Its why we have them.

If Biden and others had followed the law and apprehended and swiftly deported illegals instead of trafficking them like cartel, we would not be in this terrible situation. Nobody on your team cried about all the ways Biden failed to enforce law. Seems incredulous to expect an audience now just because orange man bad has the resolute desk.

AmericanKulak says

they can Zoom call into a hearing in the US from their country of origin

Im ok with using remote tools like Zoom if there are appeals if it can expedite procedures. IF the hearing judge issues a deportation order, I think its ok to deport immediately even if the person intends to appeal, and allow zoom meetings.. I'd be fine with that.

But this guy was deported against a court order, and isn't being offered any zoom hearing to contest it.

I am NOT ok with sending a person back wihtout a court order and then doing the initial hearing remotely in asylum cases. That doesn't make sense for obvious reasons.

yawaraf says

Is a deportation order a mere technicality or are there some reasons for which an illegal might not be deported

Its not a mere technicality. Following court orders is the fundamental mechanism of due process. Go to court, present the case, get a decision/order from the judge.

The judge in his case decided he should not be deported and issued an order NOT to deport. There are reasons why a judge might decide this way. We have laws which grant asylum to illegal immigrants in some cases. The judge may have decided this was one of them.

The people on this thread seem to think that we should ignore that particular law, and ignore the court orders, and just "Do whatever they want".

WookieMan says

What did this administration do wrong or illegal

They denied due process for a person who was entitled it, and they violated a court order by deporting him when there was an order not to deport.

That's what they did wrong.

DeficitHawk says

The judge in his case decided he should not be deported and issued an order NOT to deport.

So the alien has his day in court, it is determined he entered the country illegally, the judge orders him to not be deported. You then present some speculation as to why a judge could rule this way. However, we are talking about a specific case. Why did the judge order that he not be deported? If it is so hard to provide the facts? There must have been a very good reason to keep him in the United States. Why isn't that the first thing that's presented?

MolotovCocktail says

HeadSet says

Unfortunately, DeficitHawk is correct on the current due process rules. Unless an illegal was issued an Expedited Removal Order by Customs and Border Protection officers at the border, airports and other ports of entry while trying to enter the US without the proper documentation or who lied or used fraudulent documents when trying to enter the US, the illegal has to go before a judge.

Then explain how tens of millions of illegals were deported by Clinton, Bush and Obama.

Doesn't that count as "deported" those who were merely turned away at the border? In 1954 Eisenhower was able to mass export illegals, though.

DeficitHawk says

Don't be to quick to compromise your rights.

How are my rights compromised when millions of illegals are shipped back to fuckistan?

yawaraf says

Why did the judge order that he not be deported? If it is so hard to provide the facts? There must have been a very good reason to keep him in the United States. Why isn't that the first thing that's presented?

I dont know. You can research it if you are interested. I havent.

Patrick says

mell

The author of the thread, AmericanKulak, is on your ignore list. To unignore him, click your own icon, then "edit profile" in upper right, then at the bottom of that edit profile page, under "ignored users", click his name.

Checked and he didn't show up as ignored(possible though). Had to follow and unfollow to get this thread back.

DeficitHawk says

WookieMan says

What did this administration do wrong or illegal

They denied due process for a person who was entitled it, and they violated a court order by deporting him when there was an order not to deport.

That's what they did wrong.

He entered the country illegally. That's illegal. He's not a citizen. I don't care about the court case. He has no right to be here. Unless you filed the proper paperwork you can get tossed at any moment. Have a birth certificate. Valid passport. Even with that he likely overstayed and it and you're booted. No due process needed. Beat his spouse/girlfriend. Member of a known violent gang. The left looks like idiots on this topic. I'm not calling you one, but come on dude. I feel like this is a troll at this point.

WookieMan says

DeficitHawk says

WookieMan says

What did this administration do wrong or illegal

They denied due process for a person who was entitled it, and they violated a court order by deporting him when there was an order not to deport.

That's what they did wrong.

He entered the country illegally. That's illegal. He's not a citizen. I don't care about the court case. He has no right to be here. Unless you filed the proper paperwork you can get tossed at any moment. Have a birth certificate. Valid passport. Even with that he likely overstayed and it and you're booted. No due process needed. Beat his spouse/girlfriend. Member of a known violent gang. The left looks like idiots on this topic. I'm not calling you one, but come on dude. I feel like this is a troll at this point.

You are focusing on what you want to be the outcome of the case. That's fine. I don't disagree with you on the outcome.

I am focusing on the process. You are willing to throw process out the window to get the outcome. I am not.

If someone commits murder, and the police do a dragnet search for evidence without a search warrant, violating 4th amendment to gather evidence, and the killer is convicted as a result of the tainted evidence... is that ok? Even if the killer truly was guilty?

To me its NOT ok. Because preserving the rights in our constitution is more important than the outcome of the individual criminal case.

IF the DOJ lawyers had spent 1% of the effort people on this thread have spent to prepare a court briefing, they probably could have followed due process to get the outcome they wanted anyway. The fact that they arent even trying to follow the process is the point.

DeficitHawk says

I dont know. You can research it if you are interested. I havent.

so you don't know the legal reasoning? Was there any legal reasoning at all? Judges often just issue court orders without explanation.

It seems to me your ultimate goal is keeping mass illegal immigration going, you really don't care why they need a hearing at all.

DeficitHawk says

I am focusing on the process. You are willing to throw process out the window to get the outcome. I am not.

Yeah, not buying that excuse from somebody who just said they don't know the reasoning and haven't bothered to look at why a tresspasser can't be removed without a hearing months in the future.

And of course, I suspect you know enough to do they can't be held until the hearing, so many illegals would simply skip the hearing as a no-show and just stay anyway.

AmericanKulak says

It seems to me your ultimate goal is keeping mass illegal immigration going, you really don't care why they need a hearing at all.

Like I said to patrick, you don't have to trust my motives. I don't have to trust yours.

But we both have to follow the laws and the constitution. Its not that hard to understand.