Hawley to introduce legislation to curb court rulings against Trump agenda

Arcangl86 · Mar 22, 2025

I would just like to point out that conservatives were perfectly fine with nationwide injunctions when they were used against Obama and Biden. It's only now that it's being used against Trump that Republicans care.

Say it aint so · Mar 22, 2025

The Aliens Act as noted by several here only applies to war, and only applies to upon the government in which the US has declared war.

It's why Trump's DOJ lawyers are in court arguing the Venezuela gang infiltrated the government, and therefore are the Venezuela government, therefore the act is being used against the Venezuela government. Yes, apply mental gymnastics and it all makes sense. If it doesn't make sense, you're not applying the appropriate amount of mental gymnastics.

Servus · Mar 22, 2025

A2SG said:
If it's being followed lawfully, sure. But there seems to be some disagreement about thst, and courts are there to adjudicate disagreements like this.

There's one judge who's obstructing.

Servus · Mar 22, 2025

Say it aint so said:
The Aliens Act as noted by several here only applies to war, and only applies to upon the government in which the US has declared war.

It's why Trump's DOJ lawyers are in court arguing the Venezuela gang infiltrated the government, and therefore are the Venezuela government, therefore the act is being used against the Venezuela government. Yes, apply mental gymnastics and it all makes sense. If if doesn't make sense, you're not applying the appropriate amount of mental gymnastics.

There are three provisions in the Alien Enemies Act; Declared war. Invasion. Predatory incursion.

In other words even if there isn't declared war, the act can still be implemented to deal with invasion and predatory incursion.

Say it aint so · Mar 22, 2025

ozso said:
There are three provisions in the Alien Enemies Act; Declared war. Invasion. Predatory incursion.

In other words even if there isn't declared war, the act can still be implemented to deal with invasion and predatory incursion.

You're half reading it:

"Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies. The President is authorized in any such event, by his proclamation thereof, or other public act, to direct the conduct to be observed on the part of the United States, toward the aliens who become so liable; the manner and degree of the restraint to which they shall be subject and in what cases, and upon what security their residence shall be permitted, and to provide for the removal of those who, not being permitted to reside within the United States, refuse or neglect to depart therefrom; and to establish any other regulations which are found necessary in the premises and for the public safety."

Gangs are not governments nor foreign nations. Again, it's why they make the mental gymnastic arguments in court that this gang in fact IS the Venezuela government.

Servus · Mar 22, 2025

Say it aint so said:
You're half reading it:

"Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies. The President is authorized in any such event, by his proclamation thereof, or other public act, to direct the conduct to be observed on the part of the United States, toward the aliens who become so liable; the manner and degree of the restraint to which they shall be subject and in what cases, and upon what security their residence shall be permitted, and to provide for the removal of those who, not being permitted to reside within the United States, refuse or neglect to depart therefrom; and to establish any other regulations which are found necessary in the premises and for the public safety."

Gangs are not governments nor foreign nations. Again, it's why they make the mental gymnastic arguments in court that this gang in fact IS the Venezuela government.

The governments have been getting rid of their gangs by sending them here, therefore it's invasion by foreign government. The provision fits. That's why the act was implemented.

Say it aint so · Mar 22, 2025

ozso said:
The governments have been getting rid of their gangs by sending them here, therefore it's invasion by foreign government. The provision fits. That's why the act was implemented.

Funny, Trump's DOJ lawyers aren't making that argument, and they should know if that true.
The Venezuela government is literally sending gang members here is an extraordinary claim.
And extraordinary claims require compelling evidence.
You can place it right here ________.
And no, Trump's 3am toilet tweets on X don't count.

Servus · Mar 22, 2025

Say it aint so said:
Funny, Trump's DOJ lawyers aren't making that argument, and they should know if that true.
The Venezuela government is literally sending gang members here is an extraordinary claim.
And extraordinary claims require compelling evidence.
You can place it right here ________.
And no, Trump's 3am toilet tweets on X don't count.

I'm going by statements made by homeland security advisor Stephen Miller. What arguments are Trump's DOJ lawyers making?

Say it aint so · Mar 22, 2025

ozso said:
I'm going by statements made by homeland security advisor Stephen Miller. What arguments are Trump's DOJ lawyers making?

That's a claim. Not evidence. Not only that Miller is one of the least most credible people in the Trump admin.

Servus · Mar 22, 2025

Say it aint so said:
That's a claim. Not evidence. Not only that Miller is one of the least most credible people in the Trump admin.

That's a claim. Not evidence.

Say it aint so · Mar 22, 2025

Valletta said:
The Supreme Court does not give the president powers, the Constitution and the law do. Many of the incorrect assumptions on this thread were addressed by Stephen Miller in the following press grilling by CNN:

Steven Miller. That highly regarded constitutional law expert who took zero law classes.

stevil · Mar 22, 2025

Valletta said:
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, says he will introduce legislation to curb what he says is a “dramatic abuse of judicial authority” by courts that have issued injunctions against President Trump’s agenda, including the deportation of alleged gang members.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5205259-hawley-curbing-judicial-authority/

This will be critical legislation.

Power grab by an authoritarian wannabe government. USA is becoming more like Russia, China and North Korea every day.

When you get rid of your IGs, your JAGs, when Congress abdicate their own powers and give them to the executive branch and now with these attempts to take power from the judicial branch, all that will finally be left is to get rid of that pesky three term limit.

stevil · Mar 22, 2025

A2SG said:
Are you contending that the SCOTUS didn't have the power to rule that Biden's attempt to forgive student loan debt overstepped it's authority?

Wow, who knew?

-- A2SG, out of curiosity, where are your posts condemning this back when it happened? I can't seem to find them....

When Republicans do it, it is the Courts that are corruptly trying to limit the power of the President.
When the Dems do it, it is corrupt over reach by a rogue President

A2SG · Mar 22, 2025

ozso said:
There's one judge who's obstructing.

Or upholding the law. All depends on how you look at it.

Now Trump and his lawyers will argue their case, and the other side will argue theirs, and a judge will rule.

Then appeals can begin. Eventually, it gets decided once and for all.

Democracy in action.

-- A2SG, tis a beautiful thing....

Pommer · Mar 23, 2025

ozso said:
The governments have been getting rid of their gangs by sending them here, therefore it's invasion by foreign government. The provision fits. That's why the act was implemented.

Great, just have Congress declare the war.

Servus · Mar 23, 2025

Pommer said:
Great, just have Congress declare the war.

It's declared war OR invasion.

Pommer · Mar 23, 2025

ozso said:
It's declared war OR invasion.

Uh huh

Say it aint so · Mar 24, 2025

ozso said:
That's a claim. Not evidence.

Never said and neither tried to pass it off as evidence. Yet on the other hand, I asked you directly for evidence and you provided a claim. See the difference?

Hawley to introduce legislation to curb court rulings against Trump agenda

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Godless and without morals

Godless and without morals

Gumby

Future History Slab Carver

Well-Known Member

Future History Slab Carver

Well-Known Member

Similar threads