Bill Wrote in message:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/24/18 6:44 PM, Tim wrote:

2:20 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
The key phrase is "without due process," which, I believe, is a
violation of international law and should be a violation of U.S. law.
Trump is urging violation of pretty standard and accepted laws offered
to anyone in this country, citizen, legal resident, whatever.

Trumps opinion isn?t law Harry, and Isnt breaking any laws. Where do you
read that? You can provide a cite, I?m sure...


I didn't say that Trump was breaking the law, only that he wanted to do so.

Trump has stated he would like to get the Latino border crossers out of
the country without due process, without courts, without judges, without
hearings. That's a pretty straightfoward position. I said it should be a
violation of U.S. law, and it would be. But that wouldn't stop Trump, eh?

Of course, Trump hasn't read the Constitution or the court
interpretations, nor, obviously, is he consulting with competent legal
counsel on these issues. If he tries to do it by announcing or
implementing a policy or with a signing statement, the federal courts,
including the Supreme Court, will slap him down.

This is the reality:

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that no state shall
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law.

The 5th Amendment states no person shall be reprieved of life, liberty,
or property, without due process of law.

Due process clauses apply to non-citizens who are within the United
States ? no matter whether their presence may be or is "unlawful,
involuntary or transitory." The Supremes have ruled that due process
applies to all 'persons' within the United States, including aliens,
whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.?

But I am sure you and your buddies here would give Trump a pass on the
5th and 14th, right?


If he sends them back immediately he has not deprived them of life, liberty
or freedom. They are just not in the USA.



The Suprimos need to rewrite thst ruleing
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 6/25/18 8:41 AM, justan wrote:
Bill Wrote in message:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/24/18 6:44 PM, Tim wrote:

2:20 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
The key phrase is "without due process," which, I believe, is a
violation of international law and should be a violation of U.S. law.
Trump is urging violation of pretty standard and accepted laws offered
to anyone in this country, citizen, legal resident, whatever.

Trumps opinion isn?t law Harry, and Isnt breaking any laws. Where do you
read that? You can provide a cite, I?m sure...


I didn't say that Trump was breaking the law, only that he wanted to do so.

Trump has stated he would like to get the Latino border crossers out of
the country without due process, without courts, without judges, without
hearings. That's a pretty straightfoward position. I said it should be a
violation of U.S. law, and it would be. But that wouldn't stop Trump, eh?

Of course, Trump hasn't read the Constitution or the court
interpretations, nor, obviously, is he consulting with competent legal
counsel on these issues. If he tries to do it by announcing or
implementing a policy or with a signing statement, the federal courts,
including the Supreme Court, will slap him down.

This is the reality:

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that no state shall
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law.

The 5th Amendment states no person shall be reprieved of life, liberty,
or property, without due process of law.

Due process clauses apply to non-citizens who are within the United
States ? no matter whether their presence may be or is "unlawful,
involuntary or transitory." The Supremes have ruled that due process
applies to all 'persons' within the United States, including aliens,
whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.?

But I am sure you and your buddies here would give Trump a pass on the
5th and 14th, right?


If he sends them back immediately he has not deprived them of life, liberty
or freedom. They are just not in the USA.



The Suprimos need to rewrite thst ruleing


What "ruling," ****-for-brains? Are you referring to decided, black
letter law issues, such as the ruling that due process applies to all
persons within the United States? I doubt even the current right-wing
Supreme Court would touch that one.

On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:51:52 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/25/18 8:41 AM, justan wrote:
Bill Wrote in message:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/24/18 6:44 PM, Tim wrote:

2:20 PMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
The key phrase is "without due process," which, I believe, is a
violation of international law and should be a violation of U.S. law.
Trump is urging violation of pretty standard and accepted laws offered
to anyone in this country, citizen, legal resident, whatever.

Trumps opinion isn?t law Harry, and Isnt breaking any laws. Where do you
read that? You can provide a cite, I?m sure...


I didn't say that Trump was breaking the law, only that he wanted to do so.

Trump has stated he would like to get the Latino border crossers out of
the country without due process, without courts, without judges, without
hearings. That's a pretty straightfoward position. I said it should be a
violation of U.S. law, and it would be. But that wouldn't stop Trump, eh?

Of course, Trump hasn't read the Constitution or the court
interpretations, nor, obviously, is he consulting with competent legal
counsel on these issues. If he tries to do it by announcing or
implementing a policy or with a signing statement, the federal courts,
including the Supreme Court, will slap him down.

This is the reality:

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that no state shall
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law.

The 5th Amendment states no person shall be reprieved of life, liberty,
or property, without due process of law.

Due process clauses apply to non-citizens who are within the United
States ? no matter whether their presence may be or is "unlawful,
involuntary or transitory." The Supremes have ruled that due process
applies to all 'persons' within the United States, including aliens,
whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.?

But I am sure you and your buddies here would give Trump a pass on the
5th and 14th, right?


If he sends them back immediately he has not deprived them of life, liberty
or freedom. They are just not in the USA.



The Suprimos need to rewrite thst ruleing


What "ruling," ****-for-brains? Are you referring to decided, black
letter law issues, such as the ruling that due process applies to all
persons within the United States? I doubt even the current right-wing
Supreme Court would touch that one.

The SCOTUS had ruled many times that the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments
are not all inclusive. That is particularly true if a motor vehicle is
involved. There is no reason why they could not make illegal
immigration a special circumstance too. It is certainly seen as a
privilege, not a right to immigrate into the US. That is why we have
immigration booths at the border crossings in the first place and
nobody says a word if someone is denied entry there.