Judge that ordered deportations of illegals stopped…

[MTTiger19]

Sent 70 Trump supporters to prison on made up 1512c charges that were later overturned by the Supreme Court.

Interesting what his family does for a living:
Brother - Tom Boasberg, Superintendent of Denver Public Schools
Wife - Liddy Manson founded abortion clinic- Meadow Reproductive Health & Wellbeing
Daughter - Katherine Boasberg, works “Partners For Justice” gives criminal illegal aliens legal advice. Funded by USAID.

 

[MTTiger19]

So I would pose this question? Do the facts above make him an activist judge? Is yes, what should be done?

 

[UrHuckleberry]

I think what has happened is how the process is made to be handled. You appeal their ruling. I disagreed with the judge down in Florida's rulings a few times, and she was appealed and in some cases slapped down by the court above her, sometimes not. It's the legal process.

This whole trend of "the judicial branch ruled against me so they should be impeached" is wild to me. If someone is taking bribes or something like that, by all means, impeach away. But they disagreed with me, not as much.

 

[MTTiger19]

I think what has happened is how the process is made to be handled. You appeal their ruling. I disagreed with the judge down in Florida's rulings a few times, and she was appealed and in some cases slapped down by the court above her, sometimes not. It's the legal process.

This whole trend of "the judicial branch ruled against me so they should be impeached" is wild to me. If someone is taking bribes or something like that, by all means, impeach away. But they disagreed with me, not as much.

That wasn’t the question. If this is an activist judge what should be done? He literally had political enemies imprisoned.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

That wasn’t the question. If this is an activist judge what should be done? He literally had political enemies imprisoned.

There is a legal process, so that should be followed. Not sure what the process for censure's and potentially impeachment is. But we have checks and balances, so whatever the balance on the judiciary is. Likely impeachment by congress.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Do you have an article on the 1512c charges? This for people who entered the capital and being charged with obstructing official proceedings?

 

[MTTiger19]

There is a legal process, so that should be followed. Not sure what the process for censure's and potentially impeachment is. But we have checks and balances, so whatever the balance on the judiciary is. Likely impeachment by congress.

Correct, I don’t know either, and this could cut both ways. Judges are people so they will be flawed. It just seems dangerous. I think there are around 670 federal judges that have the same authority as Boasberg. We have no country if they all start ruling based on politics. I truly don’t know the answer. But I don’t think that we the people need to suffer while one judge makes a ruling that will be overturned. Especially one that has shown he’s willing to imprison people.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Correct, I don’t know either, and this could cut both ways. Judges are people so they will be flawed. It just seems dangerous. I think there are around 670 federal judges that have the same authority as Boasberg. We have no country if they all start ruling based on politics. I truly don’t know the answer. But I don’t think that we the people need to suffer while one judge makes a ruling that will be overturned. Especially one that has shown he’s willing to imprison people.

Sure. All checks and balances are important to me with all 3 branches. I wouldn't want all of the branches to start ignoring the others and run the country. I tend to think if there are no checks on executive power and they just start ignoring what congress has voted on or judges have ruled, that we "have no country" as you put it as well.

If judges are ruling based on self interest and aren't going by the law, I would expect them to either be slapped down by the higher courts, or eventually impeached by Congress. I do think it should generally be a high bar to impeach a judge. To impeach a judge I would expect that the higher courts should be ruling unanimously against them when things get appealed. Signaling that it is not just a differing interpretation of the law for example.

 

[MTTiger19]

Sure. All checks and balances are important to me with all 3 branches. I wouldn't want all of the branches to start ignoring the others and run the country. I tend to think if there are no checks on executive power and they just start ignoring what congress has voted on or judges have ruled, that we "have no country" as you put it as well.

If judges are ruling based on self interest and aren't going by the law, I would expect them to either be slapped down by the higher courts, or eventually impeached by Congress. I do think it should generally be a high bar to impeach a judge. To impeach a judge I would expect that the higher courts should be ruling unanimously against them when things get appealed. Signaling that it is not just a differing interpretation of the law for example.

I agree with you. Here’s one I wonder about. We know that the flight ordered to return was a flight of illegal immigrants and some of them were gang members. If we turned that plane around and one of the people being deported murdered someone here in the US in a week, is Boasberg guilty? A better way of asking that is what consequences will come from his actions. To me, simply ruling against him isn’t enough. He’s behaving in a politically motivated manner. People’s literal lives could be a pawn here.

 

[EastCHTiger]

So its activist to say that the USA should give people due process? He's not saying release the dudes, he's saying they should get a hearing and our government can't just say these people are guilty without providing some kind of proof. If they don't like the ruling, appeal it, pretty simple, ignoring it is not our system. Undermining the judicial system because you don't like their rulings is dangerous. We already have a situation where congress has abdicated their responsibility so if the judicial system goes out what are we then? The Executive branch's own party runs the law making arm of the government. If you think this is bullshit, pass a law to remedy it.

 

[MTTiger19]

So its activist to say that the USA should give people due process? He's not saying release the dudes, he's saying they should get a hearing and our government can't just say these people are guilty without providing some kind of proof. If they don't like the ruling, appeal it, pretty simple, ignoring it is not our system. Undermining the judicial system because you don't like their rulings is dangerous. We already have a situation where congress has abdicated their responsibility so if the judicial system goes out what are we then? The Executive branch's own party runs the law making arm of the government. If you think this is bullshit, pass a law to remedy it.

Whoa whoa whoa. These are not American citizens. These are illegal aliens, who are here illegally.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

I agree with you. Here’s one I wonder about. We know that the flight ordered to return was a flight of illegal immigrants and some of them were gang members. If we turned that plane around and one of the people being deported murdered someone here in the US in a week, is Boasberg guilty? A better way of asking that is what consequences will come from his actions. To me, simply ruling against him isn’t enough. He’s behaving in a politically motivated manner. People’s literal lives could be a pawn here.

To turn that around, is Trump guilty for the crimes done by the pardoned J6 peeps? I also find the last sentence somewhat ironic. As I agree that people's lives seem to be a pawn here. I also have no issues with deporting people who should legally be deported. But believe in due process period.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Whoa whoa whoa. These are not American citizens. These are illegal aliens, who are here illegally.

Why does he need to use a law from the 1700's to do it then? There are obviously some steps being skipped using that law that the judge ruled either doesn't apply or needs to be reviewed to see if it applies before moving forward.

 

[Spencer_York]

Whoa whoa whoa. These are not American citizens. These are illegal aliens, who are here illegally.

You don't know that without due process. Some of the people getting arrested by ICE aren't criminals, are here legally with Visas and Green Cards, heck there have been a couple of citizens arrested too. They're rounding up random people, accusing them of being in gangs, and just shipping them to a slave labor camp in El Salvador.

 

[MTTiger19]

Why does he need to use a law from the 1700's to do it then? There are obviously some steps being skipped using that law that the judge ruled either doesn't apply or needs to be reviewed to see if it applies before moving forward.

Very good question. Sane could be asked of the anchor baby law. We allow illegals children to become citizens. That law was for slaves. Is that one outdated or just the one you don’t like? That’s a fair question.

 

[MTTiger19]

You don't know that without due process. Some of the people getting arrested by ICE aren't criminals, are here legally with Visas and Green Cards, heck there have been a couple of citizens arrested too. They're rounding up random people, accusing them of being in gangs, and just shipping them to a slave labor camp in El Salvador.

If this is true that’s terrible. However most of those interactions begin with “show me your papers”.
There’s about 100000 of them on X. Those were doctors and engineers right? Not gang members.

 

[dpic73]

So I would pose this question? Do the facts above make him an activist judge? Is yes, what should be done?

This activist judge was confirmed 96-0 btw.

There is nothing activist about ruling on a matter that comes before the court if he's using rational jurisprudence, which it appears he was. The 1798 law was specifically written to apply to wartime or when we have been invaded by a foreign country. I'd also point out that some of these people sent to a foreign slave labor camp didn't have a single charge against them, not even a midemeanor.

 

[MTTiger19]

This activist judge was confirmed 96-0 btw.

There is nothing activist about ruling on a matter that comes before the court if he's using rational jurisprudence, which it appears he was. The 1798 law was specifically written to apply to wartime or when we have been invaded by a foreign country. I'd also point out that some of these people sent to a foreign slave labor camp didn't have a single charge against them, not even a midemeanor.

Were they here illegally?

 

[Spencer_York]

If this is true that’s terrible. However most of those interactions begin with “show me your papers”.
There’s about 100000 of them on X. Those were doctors and engineers right? Not gang members.

No, I don't think there was a "show me your papers". They just arrested people. One guy arrested in Chicago is a US citizen. He said the ICE agents took his documents away from him so he couldn't prove citizenship. They have quotas to meet and arresting law abiding legal residents is easier than arresting actual criminals. One guy got kidnapped and sent to that slave labor camp simply for having a rose tattoo.

 

[MTTiger19]

No, I don't think there was a "show me your papers". They just arrested people. One guy arrested in Chicago is a US citizen. He said the ICE agents took his documents away from him so he couldn't prove citizenship. They have quotas to meet and arresting law abiding legal residents is easier than arresting actual criminals. One guy got kidnapped and sent to that slave labor camp simply for having a rose tattoo.

Post a link to this please. That’s awful.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Very good question. Sane could be asked of the anchor baby law. We allow illegals children to become citizens. That law was for slaves. Is that one outdated or just the one you don’t like? That’s a fair question.

There is a legal process to challenge laws and am fine with things being challenged. Would say that one has been used more recently than the 1700’s and is more established. But sure, that’s the legal process. Whether I like or dislike something isn’t part of the process.

 

[dpic73]

Post a link to this please. That’s awful.

Venezuelan barber deported by Trump administration is not a gang member, family say

Venezuelan barber Francisco Javier Garcia Casique sent to El Salvador mega-prison but has no ties to notorious Tren de Aragua criminal organization, his mother and brother insist

www.the-independent.com

 

[MTTiger19]

There is a legal process to challenge laws and am fine with things being challenged. Would say that one has been used more recently than the 1700’s and is more established. But sure, that’s the legal process. Whether I like or dislike something isn’t part of the process.

That seems like a slippery slope friend. So now we have variable, arbitrary recognition of laws based on the frequency of use? You can’t say one is right and one is wrong if the argument is it’s old. Lots of laws are old. It’s either a law or not. If it were so cut and dried there wouldn’t be any controversy surrounding his decision.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

That seems like a slippery slope friend. So now we have variable, arbitrary recognition of laws based on the frequency of use? You can’t say one is right and one is wrong if the argument is it’s old. Lots of laws are old. It’s either a law or not. If it were so cut and dried there wouldn’t be any controversy surrounding his decision.

What is it you think I am saying?

 

[MTTiger19]

What is it you think I am saying?

That since one law is old and not used as often it’s irrelevant. My pushback on that would be the last administration put this one in a terrible position. Unlike anything I’ve seen in my lifetime. Hence why it hasn’t been necessary. Now it’s how can we tie their hands on a resolution. At least that’s how I’m interpreting it.

 

[Spencer_York]

Post a link to this please. That’s awful.

ICE Illegally Arrested 22 People In The Midwest Since Trump Took Office, New Lawsuit Alleges

The National Immigration Justice Center and the ACLU of Illinois are alleging that ICE violated a 2022 federal settlement. A U.S. citizen was among those arrested near Chicago.

blockclubchicago.org

 

[dpic73]

That seems like a slippery slope friend. So now we have variable, arbitrary recognition of laws based on the frequency of use? You can’t say one is right and one is wrong if the argument is it’s old. Lots of laws are old. It’s either a law or not. If it were so cut and dried there wouldn’t be any controversy surrounding his decision.

The slippery slope was the invocation of the wartime Alien Enemies Act of 1798 as the basis for their deportation to a foreign slave labor camp. They used a made-up interpretation of the law to justify not allowing due process to play out and illegally sending them to El Salvador, without vetting.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

That since one law is old and not used as often it’s irrelevant. My pushback on that would be the last administration put this one in a terrible position. Unlike anything I’ve seen in my lifetime. Hence why it hasn’t been necessary. Now it’s how can we tie their hands on a resolution. At least that’s how I’m interpreting it.

That is why I asked, that is not at all what I am saying.

I do think using a law from the 1700's that hasn't been used in centuries may warrant a judge putting a pause on the actions for further review. Which is what happened. I am not saying it is no longer a law on the books or irrelevant.

Comparing it to a law that is mostly settled case law and has come up frequently for year upon year is differently. There are precedents for how the law is applied to different situations.

 

[MTTiger19]

That is why I asked, that is not at all what I am saying.

I do think using a law from the 1700's that hasn't been used in centuries may warrant a judge putting a pause on the actions for further review. Which is what happened. I am not saying it is no longer a law on the books or irrelevant.

Comparing it to a law that is mostly settled case law and has come up frequently for year upon year is differently. There are precedents for how the law is applied to different situations.

That’s fair and I appreciate that. I do not agree that the anchor baby law is settled. Our immigration policy is insane, but to your point it has to be done through certain channels. What irritates me the most is all the clamoring for the rights of illegal immigrants and doing everything you can to circumvent removing them. What about Laken Riley’s rights. What about the American people who deserve to be safe. The politicians that put us in these positions are living in castles with bodyguards and our children are on the street with foreign gang members.

 

[fatpiggy]

The slippery slope was the invocation of the wartime Alien Enemies Act of 1798 as the basis for their deportation to a foreign slave labor camp. They used a made-up interpretation of the law to justify not allowing due process to play out and illegally sending them to El Salvador, without vetting.

Poor little terrorists.

 

[fatpiggy]

That’s fair and I appreciate that. I do not agree that the anchor baby law is settled. Our immigration policy is insane, but to your point it has to be done through certain channels. What irritates me the most is all the clamoring for the rights of illegal immigrants and doing everything you can to circumvent removing them. What about Laken Riley’s rights. What about the American people who deserve to be safe. The politicians that put us in these positions are living in castles with bodyguards and our children are on the street with foreign gang members.

Exactly. It's never about the Americans with the Democratic party.

What about all those AMERICANS who have their services reduced to accommodate people breaking the law? What about the Americans who are forced to live with the crime that comes with illegal immigration? What about the AMERICANS who have to pay more in taxes?

 

[WapPride]

What about the Americans that are swept up with the undocumented immigrants and sent to El Salvador/other detention camps without their constitutional right for due process? Do we not care about them, or is it okay to have a few instances of collateral damage?

 

[AugTig]

What about the Americans that are swept up with the undocumented immigrants and sent to El Salvador/other detention camps without their constitutional right for due process? Do we not care about them, or is it okay to have a few instances of collateral damage?

Was it ok for Biden and the dems to open the border for millions to come in? You people are all the same.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

That’s fair and I appreciate that. I do not agree that the anchor baby law is settled. Our immigration policy is insane, but to your point it has to be done through certain channels. What irritates me the most is all the clamoring for the rights of illegal immigrants and doing everything you can to circumvent removing them. What about Laken Riley’s rights. What about the American people who deserve to be safe. The politicians that put us in these positions are living in castles with bodyguards and our children are on the street with foreign gang members.

Sure, and why I would support getting more judges and people that can handle moving things through the courts quicker (bipartisan law shot down was trying to do this). Would support a number of different reforms to our immigration law. But immigration is too easy for either side to campaign for or against and so on we move with what we've got. Without laws preventing it, Biden could've found any hispanic wearing a red hat and shipped them to a slave labor camp and claimed they were illegal. I don't want Biden or Trump to have that power.

 

[WapPride]

Was it ok for Biden and the dems to open the border for millions to come in? You people are all the same.

I don't remember Biden ever "opening the border." I remember him trying to make it easier for those to come to the states legally, and also deporting more people than any President since GWB, but i'm not sure where he "opened the borders."

 

[AugTig]

I don't remember Biden ever "opening the border." I remember him trying to make it easier for those to come to the states legally, and also deporting more people than any President since GWB, but i'm not sure where he "opened the borders."

I'm not surprised at this ridiculous comment. Like I stated previously, y'all are all the same. Spin, spin, spin. You know the truth but you will never admit it.

 

[WapPride]

I'm not surprised at this ridiculous comment. Like I stated previously, y'all are all the same. Spin, spin, spin. You know the truth but you will never admit it.

I mean, you're welcome to provide information supporting your POV, but it quite literally took me 10 seconds to pull up something from a non-partisan think tank supporting my comments. You'll probably just claim it's fake news because that's what you dipshits do when something you don't agree with is posted.

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-deportation-record

 

[Clemson Goat]

There is a legal process to challenge laws and am fine with things being challenged. Would say that one has been used more recently than the 1700’s and is more established. But sure, that’s the legal process. Whether I like or dislike something isn’t part of the process.

I believe this same law was used during WW2 to deport Japanese. Since this law was written 200 years ago do we also void the US constitution .

 

[MTTiger19]

What about the Americans that are swept up with the undocumented immigrants and sent to El Salvador/other detention camps without their constitutional right for due process? Do we not care about them, or is it okay to have a few instances of collateral damage?

How did we get that point? How did it get so out of hand that the federal government is having to deploy its massive resources to deporting people that we know are here illegally and have been for sometime? It’s the classic democrat move. Create a problem, then complain about the solution. Just don’t decide 20-30 million people deserve amnesty and SS benefits and healthcare with zero vetting and this doesn’t happen right? There’s two sides to this.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

I believe this same law was used during WW2 to deport Japanese. Since this law was written 200 years ago do we also void the US constitution .

Yep, that is definitely what I was saying. Thank you for the productive convo.