Impeachment articles hit judge who ordered Trump to stop Tren de Aragua deportation flights

Turncoat justice Roberts already poo-pooed the idea of impeaching this hack judge.
And rightly so. He is not a turncoat. Kagan even stated that she disagrees with district judges having the power to rule nationwide, and she is about as liberal as you can get. It must be appealed so the SCOTUS can restrict their abilities.
 
No he isn't. He's invoking the Alien Enemy Act. To invoke it it requires:
  • Declaration of war by Congress. OR
  • Invasion by a foreign government
So when did the government of Venezuela invade the US. Was it a land attack, seaborne landing on the beach, or did they parachute troops into Wyoming?

WW
They released these criminals from their prisons with the intent of invading the US. That's the only invasion you need.

Just in case you wondered, it was a land attack across our southern border. I am surprised you missed it.
 
No, he is not. That is the problem. The law says the President can do exactly what he did. The judge is inventing some requirement for a due process hearing that isn't in the law, and he applied it to every single person being deported.
Does the law state those deported under this act must be older than 14?

Does the law state there must be a declared war with the Foreign home Nation of the deportee or the foreign home Country is invading us...?(by order of the foreign government)

Does the law state the president can not deport naturalized U.S. citizens in this act?

Etc...

Those are requirements in the Act, where the accused would get their due process that determines if those requirements are legally met....before they can be deported, is my understanding?
 
They released these criminals from their prisons with the intent of invading the US. That's the only invasion you need.

Just in case you wondered, it was a land attack across our southern border. I am surprised you missed it.
There is zip, zero, proof of that...
 
I did read it and notice the attempt to pain a crime organization to a government.

That does not change that the law requires either a declaration of war of the innovation by a foreign government to trigger AEA.

TdA is not a foreign government, it's a drug gang.



He didn't provide due process as his application of the statue violates the law.



I don't support the violent criminals. As I clearly said above, lock them up in a US jail and process them correctly. If the individual is a criminal? Prosecute them and send them to prission. If they are not convicted and still illegal, deport them to their home country.

That isn't supporting violet criminal gangs, it's supporting the Constitution.

You know? "Faithful execution of the laws of the United States" Ever hear that phrase before?

WW
That is why it is considered an invasion. Venezuela aided and abetted them to invade our country and the fact they will not take them back is proof of their intentions. They created an army of illegals from their jails and prisons and allowed them to invade the US. It is, in fact, and undercover army.
 
Focus on what the law says.

It very clearly specifies declared war and invasion by a foreign government.

A criminal organization, even when designated as a terrorist organization, is not an government.

WW
Try reading for comprehension. It says "invasion". That is what happened under Xiden. Venezuela's government invaded the US with an army of criminals. Do you want us to declare war on them and start killing their military personnel?
 
Focus on what the law says.

It very clearly specifies declared war and invasion by a foreign government.

A criminal organization, even when designated as a terrorist organization, is not an government.

WW
Did Venezuela not aid and abet the criminal army to invade the US?
 
I'm fine with a new law if needed, but we don't need one we have EXISTING law that covers it.

If they are criminals, arrest them, try them, convict them, send them to prison, then deport them.

If they are here illegally but haven't committed crimes, detain them, let them have due process, then deport them. If there is a potential for harm, keep them in jail.

That IS NOT "looking the other way". It's faithfully executing the laws. You know the thing that Trump swore he would do?

WW
Most of these criminals were already convicted in Venezuela! They let them go! How long do you think it would take to retry the thousands of illegal criminals that have not actually been convicted of anything here?
 
That was designed by the Founding Fathers. Were they wrong in your opinion?
For their time maybe not

But since then clever lawyers have found kinks in the armor that the Framers didnt know existed

Or better yet the quality of our leadership has corroded over the past years
 
This is performance theater

But the interesting thing is that it has a chance to turn the SCOTUS against Trump
 
No one is impeaching anyone. You cannot impeach a judge for disagreeing with his ruling as long as he can be appealed.
Yet impeachment has been filed. Personally. I don't agree that impeachment is the correct way to go. If I were counsel I'd file an ethics complaint with the judicial review board and get him removed from any Trump case due to bias. With his past acts and his daughter that should be easy.
 
Yet impeachment has been filed. Personally. I don't agree that impeachment is the correct way to go. If I were counsel I'd file an ethics complaint with the judicial review board and get him removed from any Trump case due to bias. With his past acts and his daughter that should be easy.
That is exactly where it will stay. Republicans aren't dumb enough to try a tactic doomed to failure.

Al Green filed articles against Trump. How did that go?
 
The judge should not be impeached over his rulings. He should be impeached because of the unethical conduct that caused and resulted from his rulings. That would require an investigation as to his political leanings and donations as well as past acts and rulings.
guardrails-v0-h2mcfv6c29re1.jpeg
 
My position is that judges have a obligation to be neutral and this judge is partisan. That's why degenerate democrats chose this activist judge. What else has he been activist about?
How exactly is this judge being an "activist?"
And nobody gives a shit about your "feelings" concerning your desire to throw the U.S. Constitution out the window in favor of some bananna republic shit where judges ONLY serve your chosen king.
What specifically do you feel this judge does or does not do that makes him an activist?
 
How exactly is this judge being an "activist?"
And nobody gives a shit about your "feelings" concerning your desire to throw the U.S. Constitution out the window in favor of some bananna republic shit where judges ONLY serve your chosen king.
What specifically do you feel this judge does or does not do that makes him an activist?
You are a democrat.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom