Trump to use wartime Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport illegal migrants from ‘enemy nations’: sources

[rjs330]

After looking at all the relevant documents and history, I suspect this whole issue will go to the Supreme Court

and the court will find

1. President Trump can invoke this act, and that it does not require a formal declaration of war to exist (which it clearly doesn't)
2. Nevertheless, the individuals set to be deported are still entitled to "due process" under a 2005 SCOTUS ruling

the only way #2 goes the way of Trump's administration is if the 2005 decision (a contentious 5-4) is overturned, which is possible, but unlikely

so the president will then have to resort to other methods to get rid of organized criminal aliens and terrorists. He will likely go back to congress and ask "how do you want to proceed, because as it stands right now, international terrorist groups can infiltrate the country and then hide behind lawyers and overwhelmed court systems, while the public is put at risk"?

I suspect that's all true and will most likely turn out that way. They can always lock these people up until their hearings. And the members of violent gangs should be.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

How did they get here? If they crossed the border then they are here illegally and broke the law.

There are a number of ways in which a person can come to the US legally and yet not have legal status (especially after 35 years). It's on the government to prove that they crossed the border illegally, not the other way around. That's easy to do when you catch someone in the act of crossing the border. 35 years later though, you're probably not proving that beyond a reasonable doubt.

So you are okay with some Constitutional rights being violated under certain circumstances? Last I knew the right to a jury trial was in the constitution.

Officially, unlawful entry is categorized as a Class B (petty) misdemeanor. Class B misdemeanor charges do not entitle you to a jury trial.

The Ins and Outs of Misdemeanors in Federal Court

We often think of federal criminal prosecutions as the most serious of all cases but are there federal misdemeanors as well? The answer is yes, misdemean

www.burnhamgorokhov.com

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?params=/context/dlj/article/4141/&path_info=Roth_20in_20PRINTER_20FINAL.pdf

I'm not sure that I agree with it in principle, but it's been established precedent since the 1800s, and it applies to the pretty much the entire US legal system (some states do juries by default for all misdemeanor cases), so this isn't some unique injustice perpetrated solely on illegal immigrants. Though I do suspect that the charge was left as a Class B misdemeanor because it allowed all immigration trials to be bench trials rather than jury trials.

 

[essentialsaltes]

How did they get here?

On a student visa? On vacation? Teleportation? It really doesn't matter unless they are being tried for the crime of crossing the border illegally, and they are not.

So you are okay with some Constitutional rights being violated under certain circumstances? Last I knew the right to a jury trial was in the constitution.

AI Overview

No, immigration hearings are civil administrative proceedings, not criminal trials, focused on determining whether a non-citizen should be removed from the United States or granted relief from removal.

Explain it to the googles.

 

[Hans Blaster]

IANAL AFAIK, there's no crime of "being a member of TdA", so it's not a matter of criminal guilt.

It could be, but only to the extent that criminal gangs are engaged in broad conspiracies to commit crimes. To be convicted they'd still have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a member committed overt act(s) in furtherance of the conspriracy.,

 

[Merrill]

The stand out feature of this is what actual evidence is there of those deported to El Salvador being gang members?? The trump administration has not released the names and not one was given due process.


A real Madrid tattoo is hardly evidence.

There is evidence of gang membership, but the scope of this isn't known

like I said, it will come down to the "due process" question.

but understand this: Democrats defending this gang is horrible political optics

and it is combined with governors and mayors in blue states openly defying federal immigration law to bring guys like this into the country illegally. Democrats don't care that these guys traffic Fentanyl, minors, kill people, whatever: they just want to get as many people through the southern border as possible and get them citizenship (ultimately), and registered as Democrats

 

[BPPLEE]

There is evidence of gang membership, but the scope of this isn't known

like I said, it will come down to the "due process" question.

but understand this: Democrats defending this gang is horrible political optics

and it is combined with governors and mayors in blue states openly defying federal immigration law to bring guys like this into the country illegally. Democrats don't care that these guys traffic Fentanyl, minors, kill people, whatever: they just want to get as many people through the southern border as possible and get them citizenship (ultimately), and registered as Democrats

Undocumented Democrats

 

[Hans Blaster]

There is evidence of gang membership, but the scope of this isn't known

It has not been presented, only claimed by untrustworthy people. (Trump admin people and their media fluffers.)

like I said, it will come down to the "due process" question.

but understand this: Democrats defending this gang is horrible political optics

But they aren't defending a gang.

1. A criminal gang is not the agent of a foreign nation-state, so it cannot "invade the US" in the fashion the AEA describes. We've been fairly clear about that.

2. Actual gang members engaged in criminal activity can be charged as such and deported under existing portions of the INA (Immigration and Naturalization Act) with out invocation of the AEA.

3. There are credible reports that non-members of the targeted gang have been deported. The government has demonstrated that they are correctly identifying members of the gang even if the Trump admin is correct about items #1 and #2.

4. Those who are allegedly deported have largely not been returned to their own country nor (as best we know) to a 3rd party country that has active criminal cases against them, but are instead being held in that 3rd party country *for compensation* meaning that effectively and legally they are still in the custody of the US and have not actually been deported.

5. The place where they are being held is notoriously cruel and would not pass the standards for convicted felons imprisoned in the US or for the detention of migrants who are not criminally charged.

What is being defended here are the rights of the accused and the rights of immigrants facing deportation. And the against the arbitrary claims of power to dispose of those whom the administration does not like.

and it is combined with governors and mayors in blue states openly defying federal immigration law to bring guys like this into the country illegally. Democrats don't care that these guys traffic Fentanyl, minors, kill people, whatever: they just want to get as many people through the southern border as possible and get them citizenship (ultimately), and registered as Democrats

This is a paranoid fantasy you have been fed that is built upon falsehoods. No governor or mayor is conspiring to bring people into the country illegally. If they were, particularly in large numbers as your statement implies, some of them would have been charged already. The less said about the "new Democratic voter" conspiracy replacement theory, the better.

 

[BPPLEE]

It has not been presented, only claimed by untrustworthy people. (Trump admin people and their media fluffers.)

But they aren't defending a gang.

1. A criminal gang is not the agent of a foreign nation-state, so it cannot "invade the US" in the fashion the AEA describes. We've been fairly clear about that.

2. Actual gang members engaged in criminal activity can be charged as such and deported under existing portions of the INA (Immigration and Naturalization Act) with out invocation of the AEA.

3. There are credible reports that non-members of the targeted gang have been deported. The government has demonstrated that they are correctly identifying members of the gang even if the Trump admin is correct about items #1 and #2.

4. Those who are allegedly deported have largely not been returned to their own country nor (as best we know) to a 3rd party country that has active criminal cases against them, but are instead being held in that 3rd party country *for compensation* meaning that effectively and legally they are still in the custody of the US and have not actually been deported.

5. The place where they are being held is notoriously cruel and would not pass the standards for convicted felons imprisoned in the US or for the detention of migrants who are not criminally charged.

What is being defended here are the rights of the accused and the rights of immigrants facing deportation. And the against the arbitrary claims of power to dispose of those whom the administration does not like.

This is a paranoid fantasy you have been fed that is built upon falsehoods. No governor or mayor is conspiring to bring people into the country illegally. If they were, particularly in large numbers as your statement implies, some of them would have been charged already. The less said about the "new Democratic voter" conspiracy replacement theory, the better.

There's no reason to keep it quiet anymore, we know about it

 

[Merrill]

It has not been presented, only claimed by untrustworthy people. (Trump admin people and their media fluffers.)

But they aren't defending a gang.

1. A criminal gang is not the agent of a foreign nation-state, so it cannot "invade the US" in the fashion the AEA describes. We've been fairly clear about that.

2. Actual gang members engaged in criminal activity can be charged as such and deported under existing portions of the INA (Immigration and Naturalization Act) with out invocation of the AEA.

3. There are credible reports that non-members of the targeted gang have been deported. The government has demonstrated that they are correctly identifying members of the gang even if the Trump admin is correct about items #1 and #2.

4. Those who are allegedly deported have largely not been returned to their own country nor (as best we know) to a 3rd party country that has active criminal cases against them, but are instead being held in that 3rd party country *for compensation* meaning that effectively and legally they are still in the custody of the US and have not actually been deported.

5. The place where they are being held is notoriously cruel and would not pass the standards for convicted felons imprisoned in the US or for the detention of migrants who are not criminally charged.

What is being defended here are the rights of the accused and the rights of immigrants facing deportation. And the against the arbitrary claims of power to dispose of those whom the administration does not like.

This is a paranoid fantasy you have been fed that is built upon falsehoods. No governor or mayor is conspiring to bring people into the country illegally. If they were, particularly in large numbers as your statement implies, some of them would have been charged already. The less said about the "new Democratic voter" conspiracy replacement theory, the better.

your statement

"A criminal gang is not the agent of a foreign nation-state, so it cannot "invade the US" in the fashion the AEA describes"

is totally wrong on several levels:

1. Tren de Aragua is not a "criminal gang" according to the DHS, ICE, and the administration: it is a designated terrorist group. They have been involved in political violence in other countries, including assassinations. They are also said to have connections to Maduro. These are not street thugs, so stop repeating the fake, left-wing talking point that these guys are something other than terrorists.

2. The text of the AEA says "invasion OR predatory incursion ...by any foreign nation or government" which is interpreted to mean that if foreigners come into our country illegally, and start committing high-level, organized crime and/or terrorism, the president can take action. Nowhere does it say a formal declaration of war needs to exist, or that the foreign nation must use its military against us.

and "There are credible reports that non-members of the targeted gang have been deported."

really? By who? MSNBC? This is another fake, left-wing talking point concerning the gang--that these guys are innocent, no evidence exists implicating them in crimes, they were rounded up unlawfully, etc. --the administration, ICE, and DHS reject these claims You haven't seen any of the evidence

and as for your claim that Democrats aren't engaged in importing illegals and giving them shelter in the US, this is disproven by the actions of mayors around the country. Here is an example:

Boston, Minneapolis Mayors Repeat Vow to Break Law Against Harboring Illegals

Michelle Wu of Boston and Jacob Frey of Minneapolis have both promised illegal aliens safe harbor in their cities.

thenewamerican.com

 

[Hans Blaster]

your statement

"A criminal gang is not the agent of a foreign nation-state, so it cannot "invade the US" in the fashion the AEA describes"

is totally wrong on several levels:

1. Tren de Aragua is not a "criminal gang" according to the DHS, ICE, and the administration: it is a designated terrorist group. They have been involved in political violence in other countries, including assassinations. They are also said to have connections to Maduro. These are not street thugs, so stop repeating the fake, left-wing talking point that these guys are something other than terrorists.

Trump says gang is "terrorists" so he can deport them under his legal theory. Sounds convenient. too convenient. Their contract killings have been discussed in other posts on this or other threads you are participating in. They are first and for most criminals. Their purpose is to make money and protect themselves from prosecution and rivals like any other gang. No different than the Crips or the Corleones.

2. The text of the AEA says "invasion OR predatory incursion ...by any foreign nation or government" which is interpreted to mean that if foreigners come into our country illegally, and start committing high-level, organized crime and/or terrorism, the president can take action. Nowhere does it say a formal declaration of war needs to exist, or that the foreign nation must use its military against us.

BY A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT. TdA is not a government. Period.

and "There are credible reports that non-members of the targeted gang have been deported."

really? By who? MSNBC?

From their LAWYERS with evidence presented in documents. That has also been posted in this or a different thread.

This is another fake, left-wing talking point concerning the gang--that these guys are innocent, no evidence exists implicating them in crimes, they were rounded up unlawfully, etc. --the administration, ICE, and DHS reject these claims You haven't seen any of the evidence

I did not say they were "innocent" or hadn't committed crimes. What I said is that the rule of law must still apply and those charges must be presented in court or we don't have a free country anymore.

and as for your claim that Democrats aren't engaged in importing illegals and giving them shelter in the US, this is disproven by the actions of mayors around the country. Here is an example:

Boston, Minneapolis Mayors Repeat Vow to Break Law Against Harboring Illegals

Michelle Wu of Boston and Jacob Frey of Minneapolis have both promised illegal aliens safe harbor in their cities.

thenewamerican.com

"Importing" and "harboring" those who are already here are very different things. I can see that in the words embedded in the URL without even opening the link. You should be able to see that as well.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Turns out it was overeager staffer who invoked the act.

Trump says he didn’t sign proclamation invoking Alien Enemies Act​

President Donald Trump on Friday downplayed his involvement in invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelan migrants, saying for the first time that he hadn’t signed the proclamation, even as he stood by his administration’s move.

“I don’t know when it was signed, because I didn’t sign it,” Trump told reporters before leaving the White House on Friday evening.

The president made his comments when asked to respond to Judge James Boasberg’s concerns in court on Friday that the proclamation was “signed in the dark” of night and that migrants were hurried onto planes.

“Other people handled it"

[Or maybe not.]

Hours after the president made his comments on Friday, the White House claimed that Trump was not talking about whether he signed the document last week.

“President Trump was obviously referring to the original Alien Enemies Act that was signed back in 1798,” a White House statement said. [Given the question was about Boasberg's concerns, this really cannot be what Trump was referring to, unless he was confused.]

“The recent Executive Order was personally signed by President Trump invoking the Alien Enemies Act that designated Tren de Aragua as a Foreign Terrorist Organization in order to apprehend and deport these heinous criminals.”

In light of the Biden autopen thread I'm shocked this was just skipped over by everyone in this thread so far.

 

[Merrill]

Trump says gang is "terrorists" so he can deport them under his legal theory. Sounds convenient. too convenient. Their contract killings have been discussed in other posts on this or other threads you are participating in. They are first and for most criminals. Their purpose is to make money and protect themselves from prosecution and rivals like any other gang. No different than the Crips or the Corleones.

BY A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT. TdA is not a government. Period.

From their LAWYERS with evidence presented in documents. That has also been posted in this or a different thread.

I did not say they were "innocent" or hadn't committed crimes. What I said is that the rule of law must still apply and those charges must be presented in court or we don't have a free country anymore.

"Importing" and "harboring" those who are already here are very different things. I can see that in the words embedded in the URL without even opening the link. You should be able to see that as well.

So you are going to have a tantrum over Trump potentially violating the law in denying these gangbangers due process

but you are perfectly fine with Democratic mayors breaking federal immigration law by harboring and protecting illegal aliens, including those who are part of international criminals?

ok bro

there is this word in the dictionary called hypocrisy ...

 

[Hans Blaster]

So you are going to have a tantrum over Trump potentially violating the law in denying these gangbangers due process

I am having no "tantrum" and I will kindly ask you to cease such characterizatoins.

When the due process rights of any accused of crimes are denied due process we all are injured.

but you are perfectly fine with Democratic mayors breaking federal immigration law by harboring and protecting illegal aliens, including those who are part of international criminals?

I said no such things. I was correcting the false characterization of those mayors and governors as "importing" anyone from outside the country.

ok bro

there is this word in the dictionary called hypocrisy ...

It would seem that you do not understand that word or are not reading what I wrote carefully. I would suggest that you read what I write more carefully before responding.

 

[Servus]

There are those who want these criminals to sit in jail for a long time while being duly processed until they're finally sent home.

Which is somehow supposed to be altruistic.

And then there are those who want them sent home immediately without delay.

Which is somehow supposed to be sadistic.

If you were in their position would you want to spend months in jail before being sent home? Or would you rather be sent home right away?

 

[stevil]

The American left also wants a strengthened Europe and a diminished US. So I don't understand all the complaining.

Who on the USA left has said that? Or are you attempting to be disingenuous?

 

[essentialsaltes]

And then there are those who want them sent home immediately without delay.

Which is somehow supposed to be sadistic.

No, it just violates the Constitution. Terrible strawman.

 

[Servus]

No, it just violates the Constitution. Terrible strawman.

No, people have been going on about the cruelty of them being deprived of their rights et al. Probably not realizing they're calling for them to spend more time in jail instead of being sent home sooner.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Probably not realizing they're calling for them to spend more time in jail instead of being sent home sooner.

Trump is doing catch and release, too. If ICE keeps arresting people, they'll have to do even more of it, because the detention centers are full. Not to mention that detaining people costs the taxpayers money.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Czar Homan says he still doesn't care what the judge thinks, but...

Homan, Trump's border czar, says administration won't defy judge's order on deportation flights​

[What of the ones already illegally transported?]

 

[Servus]

Trump is doing catch and release, too. If ICE keeps arresting people, they'll have to do even more of it, because the detention centers are full. Not to mention that detaining people costs the taxpayers money.

All the more reason to go with the Alien Enemies Act and send them home right away.