Trump invokes Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to speed up deportations, judge stalls it hours later

Try this on for size …

“Today, some anti-immigration politicians and groups urge a non-literal reading of invasion and predatory incursion so that the Alien Enemies Act can be invoked in response to unlawful migration and cross-border narcotics trafficking. These politicians and groups view the Alien Enemies Act as a turbocharged deportation authority. But their proposed reading of the law is at odds with centuries of legislative, presidential, and judicial practice, all of which confirm that the Alien Enemies Act is a wartime authority. Invoking it in peacetime to bypass conventional immigration law would be a staggering abuse.”

And this:

“These shortcomings should lead a court to strike down the Alien Enemies Act if the law is once again invoked, whether in peacetime or in war.”

 

Who are we kidding. The Democrats will go to the wall to prevent illegals from being deported. It was kind of amusing watching them pretend that they wanted to deport illegals before the election. Everybody knew that they were lying. They reliably never support anything that the majority of Americans want.

 

The judge is interpreting the law to their own viewpoint. We need judges who actually serve their country and consider the consequences of their actions.

 

Were these people deported "illegals"? Read this: https://penncapital-star.com/2025/0...vador-prison-werent-gang-members-lawyers-say/
I'm not convinced that these individuals were vetted thoroughly, which is why they wisked them off against a court order, which is another problem by itself. All the rest of us "regular" folks have to abide by judges rulings, why is trump above that? Why all the secrecy and hurry? We all deep down know why......
Because trump wants to make headlines and show how tough he is. So it's very possible that there are mistakes being made that are very detrimental to some innocent people, but it's all kept in secrecy, even to a judge, so it's very hard to determine. Did you catch that they are ages 14 and up?
Personally, I find the actions of the trump administration deplorable. Not because it rids the US of gang members, that's ok, but because of the way it was done and all the secrecy surrounding it. Immigrants, in general, are not the enemy. If this is allowed, I am concerned that trump will use the same tactics to go after members of the press he doesn't like and political opponents. Later, why not just start shipping off the libs? The judges who don't get with the program?
Just to claim that they're "illegals" and it's ok to treat them inhumanely and without due process opens the door wide open for fascism.
And trump supporters are excusing this and even cheering trump on. I'm 63 years old and my optimism for this country that I've been proud of for so long is at a low point of my life.

 

Your optimism will get much lower when you are retired and SS begins going tits up. As a rather bright fellow, I looked at the numbers decades ago and realized that there would not be enough workers to support retirees when I hit retirement age. For that reason, my retirement plan assumes NO social security benefits. If you did not do the same and live another two decades, life is going to get incredibly difficult for you. Ain't no way on earth that 2.4 workers can provide for themselves and for you at the same time.

The government has betrayed you over the course of decades in much the same way that humans betray cattle in the abattoir. This problem was eminently solvable throughout and the elites running the country never lifted a finger to stop the bleeding. I strongly suspect another Covid virus targeted at the elderly will be "accidentally" released in the relatively near future. That would certainly solve much of the government's unfunded liabilities.

 

The whole idea by invoking war time measures was to bypass due process, and sure enough, many of the deportees had no criminal record and no association to any gangs. Due process exists so mistakes like that won't be made, and bypassing due process pretty much guarantees mistakes WILL be made.

Why not do things the right & legal way?

 

Actually he was initially appointed by Bush, and was confirmed with unanimous vote in Senate.

 

I hear what you're saying, but it doesn't have much to do with what I posted. I do have some thoughts on the subject of SS, but this is the wrong thread for that so I'll do some research and look for an opportunity to comment in a more relevant thread.
Did you read the article? What do you think about the concept of snatching up 200+ people and whisking them off to a foreign prison (paid for by taxpayer money) without any recourse or due process? Please don't say "because they're illegals" because there is significant evidence that many were not here illegally.

 

How do you know what their “viewpoint” is? Judges serve their country by applying the law, not by doing what the government wants. Jesus, that’s unreasonable, Rob.

 

The Democrat shill "judge" who has done all he can to obstruct a president in our continuing war on terrorist organizations is a FEDERAL DISTRICT judge. Now, for the third time -- he's a U. S. FEDERAL DISTRICT Court Judge in Washington D. C. And he was made a U. S. Federal DISTRICT Court Judge in Washington D. C. by -- not the RINO "W" Bush -- but, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!

"W" Bush appointed Boasberg to be a judge on the "Superior Court of the District of Columbia". You know what it does? "It hears cases involving criminal and civil law, as well as family court, landlord and tenant, probate, tax and driving violations (no permit and DUI)." Link: Superior Court of the District of Columbia - Wikipedia

That's a far cry being the Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Boasberg's further elevation to that station happened in 2023, so you can thank Joe Biden's 'autopen signature machine' for that!

 

"Woulda, coulda, shoulda", and 'Opinions are like buttholes -- everybody's got one!'

Whether what this president is doing is 'at odds with centuries' of past paradigms or not -- now, in 2025, this issue will be conclusively decided by the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court decides that the whole 'war on terror' that has been in force LEGALLY since 2001 -- and -- the LEGAL declaration that foreign terrorist gangs are our enemies in this war -- is to be overturned and presidential authority as the Commander-in-Chief in this war is stricken down, then SO BE IT.

God help us if it does... because then we'll just sink deeper in the hole that the Democrat Party created when it cavalierly began throwing our borders wide open to the scum of the earth ten years ago under 'Messiah' Obama!

 

You'll notice, Pro, that I put the word, "DISTRICT" in all-caps in my post. I did that to differentiate the appointment given by RINO "W" Bush from the lofty elevation conferred later by Barack Obama. I put it in all-caps so that our friend, Bush Lawyer would be sure to take notice of the difference... but he didn't... or simply didn't want to....

"A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest" -- Paul Simon, "The Boxer"

 

Yea, because it doesn't make any difference. Both presidents picked him, and Senate approved him with unanimous vote and for some reason you think that's a bad thing........ go figure. He is only doing his job, but I get it that it makes you angry that some people still stand for the Constitution.

 

Yeah - but the opinions I posted came from EXACTLY the same article that you relied on.

Now you disregard it when it is pointed out that the part you didn’t read completely undermines you.

 

The President has no authority to declare war. Even MAGA has to admit that this is a HUGE stretch on the part of the Trump administration, and one that aims to strip people of Constitutional rights without due process. You shouldn't take this lightly, dude. Trump is running roughshod over the law and the Constitution in multiple cases.

If you are working about "sinking deeper in the hole," Trump is the one you should be worried about. Not Dems.

 

Oh, I read it... although I doubt that you took notice of my use of the word, "LEGAL" in my Post #161.

Look, we can sit here and have opinions and conjecture, and reflect on past customary procedures during past decades and centuries -- what is important at this point is whether or not a president (ANY president) has the authority to pursue executive actions in this never-terminated, ongoing war on terrorism. And yes, Tren de Aragua is (IS) designated as a "Foreign Terrorist Organization"!

 

Yardy, did you not know that since 2001 we have already had an ongoing 'war on terrorism'?! Trump doesn't need to 'declare' war on terrorist organizations if they've already been identified as such -- the declaration was made 24 years ago. Back then the terrorism was (and still remains) the Islamo-Nazis. Today? We've simply added to the list of enemies that we are engaged in combat with -- due to their involvements in various violent and criminal activities, including drug trafficking and human trafficking.

 

I'll take that as an opinion pulled out of a hat. You are entitled to your opinions.

 

LOL.

 

The war on terrorism is not an actual war. It is a figurative one. It is symbolically a "war." It is not an actual war. Congress declares those, not the president. And you are in a position where you are arguing that Trump can declare whomever he wishes to be a terrorist, based on his whim alone, and take away their rights without due process. Right now that is limited to non-citizens, which I have a feeling you are unfortunately fine with, but in the past this has been used on citizens as well. I don't think you understand what you are defending.

 

Did Obama trample the Constitution when he decided to overthrow the government of Libya, with which we were completely at peace, in 2011? He didn't even bother to comply with the War Powers Act of 1973! And, in so doing, he made Libya an Islamo-Nazi quagmire where we can't even have our U. S. Embassy open to this day!

There are quite number of things I don't like about what Trump is doing overall -- but as Commander-in-Chief and as a president who takes the sovereignty of the United States and our borders very seriously, he's head and shoulders above any Democrat president we've had in my long lifetime!

 

I criticized Obama, dude. But I'm not interested in your attempt to change the subject. Why is illegal immigration more important to you than the Constitution? Trump has more contempt for the Constitution than any President in modern US history, dude. It isn't even close.

 

You are partially right -- on paper. But you probably should review this: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2001/09/what-sort-of-war-did-the-u-s-declare.html

"Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, has duck feathers, and lays duck eggs?" Maybe it's a duck!

 

You still aren't answering why someone should have all of their Constitutional rights removed just because a President feels like they might be a terrorist. Why deny someone their legal right to due process just because you think their tattoos look funny?

 

It’s more than that. The action has to be taken by a foreign government or nation. A criminal gang doesn’t fit that category.