So it doesn't say they're not entitled to due process.
? I condemned Obama and Biden for deportations. I did so again in this very thread.
Funny Events of the "Woke" world
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,755
- 3,331
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
You very clearly didn't read the very post you quoted, because I went over expedited removal IN MY POST.Let's do that. You initially replied to me because I said to Silvanus that the deportations weren't of legal residents and I was asking of proof of that (that still hasn't been provided). I agreed with you that there are some individual cases that are pretty bad, but the narrative that ICE and Trump are just going around deporting legal residents, ignoring court orders, ignoring laws, etc.; that's all complete bunk. I do obviously care about the anyone getting wronged regardless of what it is (and that has happened) but it's not happening on a large or massive scale.
Funny Events of the "Woke" world
"I know they did it for specific, malicious reasons, I just don't know what they are" is one hell of a delusion. Again, not what I'm saying. My central point is that this was not merely the result of broad policy, as you characterised it, sweeping up a few people in error. There need be no...forums.escapistmagazine.com
This was also ALL BEFORE TRUMP. You guys only complain when someone you don't like does this stuff.
The deportation process has been transformed drastically over the last two decades. Today, two-thirds of individuals deported are subject to what are known as “summary removal procedures,” which deprive them of both the right to appear before a judge and the right to apply for status in the United States. In 1996, as part of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), Congress established streamlined deportation procedures that allow the government to deport (or “remove”) certain noncitizens from the United States without a hearing before an immigration judge. Two of these procedures, “expedited removal” and “reinstatement of removal,” allow immigration officers to serve as both prosecutor and judge—often investigating, charging, and making a decision all within the course of one day. These rapid deportation decisions often fail to take into account many critical factors, including whether the individual is eligible to apply for lawful status in the United States, whether he or she has long-standing ties here, or whether he or she has U.S.-citizen family members.
So yes, a person can be deported without judicial review, but they are also required to be given judicial review if they ask for it. This is how it works and has worked for longer than you have been alive. Everyone is entitled to due process.
Right, but it says that the process they are due might not require any courts or judges involved. We're back at that "everyone is due some amount of process, but what that process is may vary so greatly as to make the discussion of that phrase meaningless."
Correct. And I'm not here arguing that it's illegal that no court or judge was involved in each case. I'm arguing that the process to which they are entitled wasn't followed. Zero notice, no meaningful opportunity to pursue habeas, no opportunity for judicial review. Processes explicitly stated as applicable by federal courts.
I'm not discussing the phrase. I'm using it to refer to the processes that are due, and I've separately been clear in describing what those specifically are here. It's Phoenix that is arguing that "due process is not required", a self-contradicting argument that essentially means no process is due.
But of course, you're not bringing this up with him, because your main purpose here isn't clarity, it's defence of summary deportations.
You have to appreciate that Phoenix is more earnest than either of us, he's never going to appreciate the sort of pedantry we provide here. You're gonna need to spell out "its not that there isn't due process, the due process is just different" to advance the argument.
You (and maybe some of them) are interpreting due process as some uniform thing that people have or don't have. It isn't that they don't require due process, it's that lesser kinds of process are due. The federal government and the courts agree there is a certain right to judicial review when the potential deportee chooses to pursue it, and the broadest claim being made is that the speed of deportation has effectively denied people that opportunity. But I don't know of anyone who has been deported while having filed such a request, and I don't know if "Come on! They only gave us like two days!" is a serious argument that will hold up in court.
It says ICE can be both prosecutor and judge so what is it that Trump is doing illegally? Sure, technically still due process, but you the court system isn't required. You said the 238 Venezuelans didn't get due process, where is your evidence of that? You've provided zero evidence of your claim from the very start. The very telling thing is that you all keep posting the news story about Trump ignoring the judge's order about returning the planes. But if ICE/Trump couldn't deport them in the 1st place (regardless of that judge's ruling about returning the planes), then there'd be stories all over the place about that, but there isn't.
It's not just you (as I said ya'll). It's funny how when one guy does something, it's not really talked about and then when another guy does the same thing, it's a massive issue that is talked about incessantly.
Ok, so what is ICE/Trump doing that is illegal?
Yeah, I was assuming due process required going through a whole legal procedure in court and a judge and everything.
The specifics of what are due have been explained several times.
Not "only two days". None. People were not told their status had changed, were told nothing, and some were taken to the airport the morning after the order had been made-- even though it hadn't been made public. That is a denial of the ability to pursue habeas, a denial of the right to request judicial review. There was no physical way they could have filed.
I beg you, go back and read the ruling from the federal appeals court posted earlier. It very clearly explains all this-- the processes that are due, the entitlements, and how they weren't followed.
There would be no point. You wouldn't read it. You just pretend you were right anyway
How do I know this? It's already been posted.
If you just want to think you are right, go ahead. Nobody cares. If you want to prove to us you are right, do some research. The people here have kindly posted it for you
I can understand that citizens have a higher level of due process than migrants
I can't understand the claim that there's none for migrants. (Not your claim)
But, you are now getting to the truth of the matter. This is choas meant to deform the meaning of Due Process and Trump can use that to attack political opponents later
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,755
- 3,331
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
Denying due process to immigrants while not following legal deportation procedures.
Renditioning people to a foreign prison and refusing the follow court orders to return them.
Deporting children who are US citizens.
It's like you haven't paid attention to anything in the last 50 pages of this thread.
So you're arguing with us based on your own assumption on how things work without doing any research and without reading any of the sources we've provided actually explaining how things work, including direct links to the actual laws, and apparently you think the rest of us are unreasonable for judging you for it.
I already posted these earlier in the thread, but I'll post it again since you ask;
"It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter. But in this case, it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear. The government asserts that Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS-13. Perhaps, but perhaps not. Regardless, he is still entitled to due process."
"We have held that an individual subject to detention and removal under that statute is entitled to “‘judicial review’” as to “questions of interpretation and constitutionality” of the Act as well as whether he or she “is in fact an alien enemy fourteen years of age or older.” (Under the Proclamation, the term “alien enemy” is defined to include “all Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older who are members of TdA, are within the United States, and are not actually naturalized or lawful permanent residents of the United States.”)"
"It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law” in the context of removal proceedings. So, the detainees are entitled to notice and opportunity to be heard “appropriate to the nature of the case.” More specifically, in this context, AEA detainees must receive notice that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs".