When my guy does something I like, I do cheer. When their guy does something I dislike, I’ll boo.
But what happens when my guy does something I like, but which I would boo if their guy did?
I worry about this.
In addition, I look at how I would react if something my guy is doing today, were to be done by their guy tomorrow. I need to be willing to accept both theirs and mine doing this thing.
I was extremely upset when Joe Biden’s masters were ignoring Supreme Court rulings. Is my guy ignoring court rulings?
One of the things to understand is how our Constitutional Republic works. We, The People, have rights. Our state has rights derived from The People of the state.
The federal government and the state government have power. They have power by existing.
The federal Constitution grants authority to the federal government to do certain things, and only those things.
Consider the following, a squad of cops breaks down your door, throws you in irons, transports you to the jail and locks the cage.
Under our Constitution, the cops only have the authority to do so if they have a warrant. If they don’t have that warrant, they do not have the authority to detain you. Did they have the power to do so? Obviously, they did because they did detain you, and they did throw you in jail.
The Supreme Court was not granted any authority under our Constitution. Our Constitution established a Supreme Court, but they didn’t explicitly give the Supreme Court any Authority.
With —Marbury V. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) the Supreme Court took the authority to arbitrate what was and what was not Constitutional.
We, as a country, have accepted this.
When we look at the courts, they have significant authority, they do not always have the power to enforce their authority.
When the judge looks down from his bench and orders a person into jail, it is Law Enforcement that executes that order. In some cases, the court employs those people. In federal court, the enforcement power rests in the executive branch, such as the federal marshals, who report to DoJ.
So, in the cases I’m looking at, the court has the authority but lacks the power.
Tren de Aragua(TdA)
What is due process as it relates to TdA?
We start with what due process do you have? You are stopped while walking down the street and the cop demands your papers.
You do not have to produce papers when a cop demands them (IANAL). In some states, you might have to identify yourself, but that does not require you to provide papers.
If you have followed your state’s laws regarding providing identification, what next?
Go watch some YouTube videos and reach out to a lawyer in your state. I have nothing to say because I just don’t know.
As a citizen, you have the right to a jury of your peers. You have the right to due process. You have the right to legal representation.
They do not have the authority to just disappear you into a cell.
You will get your day in court. If you are not found guilty, you will be released. It can be expensive, but you don’t get thrown into a cage without due process.
But what if you are here illegally?
If you are an illegal alien, then they only need to prove that you are here illegally. Once they prove that, you can be deported.
The question arises, who do they have to prove legality to? To a judge? To some nameless official? To their drinking buddies? Who?
In the case of TdA and other gangs, like MS-13, they self identify as belonging to those gangs. As part of those gangs, they are not welcome in the United States. Because they are not wanted, they do not have visa or green cards. Since they are not here legally, they can be deported.
But what if they do have a visa or green card?
Simple, those can be revoked. Being a member of such a gang is enough of a reason for the State Department to revoke a visa and/or a green card.
Once they are deported, it becomes the responsibility of the receiving country to deal with those deported.
Well, we decided to fly TdA members to El Salvador. There is an interesting law in El Salvador. According to one source, TdA are by definition criminals in El Salvador.
Under El Salvadorian law, any member of TdA can be arrested and jailed.
When these deportees arrived in El Salvador, the El Salvadorian officials determined if they were indeed members of TdA.
Since they were in El Salvador, they are, by definition, criminals. Thus, they can be jailed.
They were then in processed and get to stay in the comfort of El Salvador super max prison.
Was due process served? Yes. Could it have been abused? Yes. Will it be abused when the democrats regain power? Yes, it will.
How do I know that it will be abused by democrats? Because they did so over the last four years.
Comments
3 responses to “Due Process”
I remember that Marbury doesn’t make a Constitutional argument but rather states that it is the job of courts to say what the law is. That’s hard to dispute. So “is it Constitutional” is actually a shorthand for “is it law, one that was created in accordance with the rules the Constitution gives for doing so?”
To pick an example, the Constitution says that Congress shall make no law establishing a religion. If Congress does so anyway, we say that “the law is unconstitutional”. More precisely, by Marbury, it isn’t a law at all, because the Constitution says that no such law can exist so a piece of paper with letters on it that tries to establish a religion isn’t a law, and therefore has no meaning.
The same reasoning can be applied to “international agreements” — the Constitution lists only treaties, which are only real if ratified by 2/3 of the Senate. So the conclusion is that an “agreement” not so ratified isn’t anything meaningful.
I like to mention the Dutch “constitution” which in article 120 explicitly forbids courts to judge the constitutionality of any law or treaty. I view that as this constitution declaring itself void. In any case, it would be entertaining for a Dutch court to use the Marbury reasoning to disregard article 120. I doubt any will ever work up the balls to do so, unfortunately.
Foreign invaders who are also terrorists and non-uniformed combatants making war upon the American People do NOT have the right to due process.
Instead of spending money we don’t have to fly them back home we should be executing them on the spot as is our right under the International Laws of War and as the soulless inhuman filth in question have repeatedly proven they deserve.
Expecting Trump to obey random court orders every time they make a command that might arguably be valid is expecting Trump to fight with two hands tied behind his back. We only have him for shy of four more years, and we may only have this level of power in Congress for less. He must ignore these orders and not allow these ridiculous judges to waste our precious time.
These courts seem to think they would have had the authority to ground the fighter planes at Hawaii on December 7 1941, and to demand the president to disclose the positions of all US anti air installations everywhere, after all those Japanese pilots weren’t given due process, some may even not have personally committed any crimes in our country before they were fired upon. Its absurd, and its treasonous.
I want a powerful and respectable judicial system, but it is not Trump who is provoking this crisis. He has the right and the duty to do, as Lincoln did, and suspend Habeus Corpus. This is a case of Invasion, and the endless string of crimes and accidents caused by these invaders certainly requires it.
It bothers me too, but it must be done.