—> US Sends More Immigrants to Salvadoran Prison | SCOTUS vs POTUS

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 23K
  • Politics 
From the end: "We yet cling to the hope that it is not naïve to believe our good brethren in the Executive Branch perceive the rule of law as vital to the American ethos. This case presents their unique chance to vindicate that value and to summon the best that is within us while there is still time."

Oh, Judge Wilkinson, how are you so credulous after all this time on Earth?

Seriously, I know he has to write that because the WH responds poorly to criticism, but come on. It's not necessarily that they think the rule of law is not important. It's that they have an intentionally blinkered view of it that makes their "rule of law" look different from everyone else's.
 
Reuters: APPEALS COURT DENIES JUSTICE DEPARTMENT'S REQUEST TO HALT JUDGE'S ORDER REQUIRING IT TO 'FACILITATE' RETURN OF WRONGLY DEPORTED MAN
 
 
Reuters: APPEALS COURT DENIES JUSTICE DEPARTMENT'S REQUEST TO HALT JUDGE'S ORDER REQUIRING IT TO 'FACILITATE' RETURN OF WRONGLY DEPORTED MAN
In case you want to read it, Copy of decision is on prior page of this thread.
 
It doesn't matter what his record is. It's still illegal to deport him to another country's prison.
That's the irony. He could (should) have been deported, legally, to most any country except the one where he's actually a citizen.
 
That's the irony. He could (should) have been deported, legally, to most any country except the one where he's actually a citizen.
How do you deport someone to a country in which he/she is not a citizen? Most countries only accept the return of citizens. Once you get an order from an immigration court saying you can't deport back to where you are from, it is very close to an actual asylum order.

Or, do you think it was just a coincidence that Trump/Biden let him report to his immigration officer once a year since 2019 and made no actual efforts to deport him?
 
Yes, as a legal matter that is true.

Suppose a person has a green card. When he goes back to his home country, let's say he's arrested, killed and his body cut into pieces with a bone saw. The home country says, "we were just applying our law to our citizen." According to your logic/Trump logic, that's the end of the story -- the US has no interest here, because he's a citizen in the country where his citizenship lies.

Is that how you think the legal system works here?

And think about extradition: when a non-citizen commits a crime on our soil, and then flees back home, can the US extradite him, to try him for his crimes here? The answer is yes. And while the US cannot *compel* that return, the US has every expectation that he will be extradited (per extradition treaties).
Also, weren't some of the Iranian dissidents that were detained in Iran and called hostages by successive presidents Iranian citizens.
 
There is a major flaw in Trump’s plan. Trump’s concentration camp is not at all defended. In WW3 those will be liberated first.

I say that in jest but not sure how much.
 
Back
Top