ADVERTISEMENT

Judge that ordered deportations of illegals stopped…

Here’s a great story from one of our allies:

The city of Berlin has been a major magnet for migrants, but instead of the economic boom promised, they are costing the state billions of euros. Now, the city is throwing more debt at the problem, which will be facilitated by the massive debt package passed by the Christian Democrats (CDU), Christian Socialists (CSU), Social Democrats (SPD), and the Greens.
European immigration is different than the US and why the US has historically been better. The US gives anyone, regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, etc the ability to be American. Europeans still have a 19th century ethnic nationalism and so often exclude people from assimilation
 
This should really piss some people off but I believe I saw a clip of Elon describing the verbiage used to make laws and he was explaining that it’s purposely vague and the language is selected specifically to be used so that different interpretations or interpretations of enforcement can be made. In other words it’s not black and white like it should be. In all honesty laws should be written where a freshman in college could understand the application, enforcement and punishment.
I only disagree with one thing: "In all honesty laws should be written where a freshman in college could understand the application, enforcement and punishment."

I think they should be written where a freshman in high school should be able to.
 
That's probably more an indictment on US education than legalese. Elon's not wrong, though, wrt to text framing in legal documents, it's a PITA to navigate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 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.
"We have no country if they all start ruling based on politics."

How do you separate a ruling "based on politics" from the general concept of having an opinon? At the moment ruling based on politics means disagreeing with the Trump administration, previously it meant disagreeing with Biden, and so on.

The more blatant introduction of "politics" into the judicial system is impeaching judges for plainly political reasons.
 
Clarence Thomas doesn't recuse himself from cases his family stands to benefit from, yet we are all worried about lower court activist judges. Just yawn stuff
 
The judical check on the federal legislature and executive as conceived by the framers resided in the SCOTUS. I don't believe that they ever conceived of whole system of 100's of federal judges at lower levels, each having the power to essentually block the actions ofthe POTUS and insert themselves into his management of the executive branch.

And here we are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

Section 1​

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Interpretation:

The second sentence of Article III, Section 1, says: “The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.” It’s pretty clear what’s going on here: this provision is designed to make sure that the judges are independent. They can decide cases according to what they think the law requires, without worrying about whether some powerful person—or even a majority of the people—will object. As Alexander Hamilton put it in The Federalist No. 78, judicial independence “is the best expedient which can be devised in any government to secure a steady, upright, and impartial administration of the laws.”

Section 2​

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ANEW
The judical check on the federal legislature and executive as conceived by the framers resided in the SCOTUS. I don't believe that they ever conceived of whole system of 100's of federal judges at lower levels, each having the power to essentually block the actions ofthe POTUS and insert themselves into his management of the executive branch.

And here we are.
Absolute truth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Allornothing

Section 1​

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Interpretation:

The second sentence of Article III, Section 1, says: “The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.” It’s pretty clear what’s going on here: this provision is designed to make sure that the judges are independent. They can decide cases according to what they think the law requires, without worrying about whether some powerful person—or even a majority of the people—will object. As Alexander Hamilton put it in The Federalist No. 78, judicial independence “is the best expedient which can be devised in any government to secure a steady, upright, and impartial administration of the laws.”

Section 2​

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
Who the hell is going to check out of control activist judges? They can only be removed with 67 senate votes so that's not happening. No accountability at all. This is horse sh1t.
 
When we were in a World War? Would guess not.

We are in a dire situation now similar to a world war.

More people die per day from Fentanyl coming across the border about 340 per day than WW2 DEATHS OF 300 or so a day.

Then if one wants to really get funky 1200 people die a day from results of cigarette smoking including babies and children as a result of secondhand smoke.
 
lol at blaming immigration solely at the feet of democrats. Dems proposed a bill that would increase funding for more immigration lawyers, more money for ICE, and more support for the legal immigration efforts to help expedite the backlog so people could apply and get feedback faster than a decade. Republicans balked bc they didn’t want to give dems a win and were salty there was no wall funding (stupid as **** to begin with.)

Undocumented immigrants don’t get SS benefits or healthcare, beyond life saving care.

The fact is neither side wants to “fix” it because it’s a good tool to drive people out to vote.
I have to believe this is one of the most clueless responses to immigration policy’s yet.
They have been getting healthcare and benefits upon arrival.
Dems like AoC have been protecting illegals, illegally and now mayor of Boston included
Dems wanted more “lawyers” to protect illegals and guess where that money comes from?

US Tax payers……… I know you libs hate Doge and what Elon is finding but suck it up buttercup, you can’t print money without accountability forever.
**** are you guys dumb 🤦‍♂️
 
European immigration is different than the US and why the US has historically been better. The US gives anyone, regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, etc the ability to be American. Europeans still have a 19th century ethnic nationalism and so often exclude people from assimilation
If you lived in Latin America like I have you’d understand why the US should adopt their same laws and you rarely see any illegal immigration’s in the US other than drug use which the cartels exploit with China, Canada and Mexico.
 
Who the hell is going to check out of control activist judges? They can only be removed with 67 senate votes so that's not happening. No accountability at all. This is horse sh1t.
There's nothing "activist" about following the law Growls. Also, keep in mind he didn't rule against them, he just asked for a temporary pause to give him time to investigate. He might rule in favor of the administration so this threat to impeach him is absurd. After all, we now know there were innocent, non-gang members who followed the lawful asylum process who are now doing slave labor in a foreign prison. Is that not a problem to you?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Cabotiger
There's nothing "activist" about following the law Growls. Also, keep in mind he didn't rule against them, he just asked for a temporary pause to give him time to investigate. He might rule in favor of the administration so this threat to impeach him is absurd. After all, we now know there were innocent, non-gang members who followed the lawful asylum process who are now doing slave labor in a foreign prison. Is that not a problem to you?
Horse crap dpic. We know what this is........pure obstruction. A judicial coup de tat underway. This issue was already ruled on by scotus in 1948 as has been mentioned all over social media and on tv this week. This radical leftist appointed as a judge by the communist dems is just doing what he has been told to do regardless of judicial precedent and history.
 
There's nothing "activist" about following the law Growls. Also, keep in mind he didn't rule against them, he just asked for a temporary pause to give him time to investigate. He might rule in favor of the administration so this threat to impeach him is absurd. After all, we now know there were innocent, non-gang members who followed the lawful asylum process who are now doing slave labor in a foreign prison. Is that not a problem to you?
You really are out of your lane on this issue, step aside shut the **** up and go to bed.
 
Horse crap dpic. We know what this is........pure obstruction. A judicial coup de tat underway. This issue was already ruled on by scotus in 1948 as has been mentioned all over social media and on tv this week. This radical leftist appointed as a judge by the communist dems is just doing what he has been told to do regardless of judicial precedent and history.
He was originally appointed by George Bush dillweed. Just because you rule against Trump doesn't make you a radical leftist. Remember how you raged about radical leftist judge Tanya Chutkan before she ruled FOR Trump in the end?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Cabotiger
You really are out of your lane on this issue, step aside shut the **** up and go to bed.
You think your nano brain is the keeper of all knowledge asshole? If I wanted to listen to your bullshit, I'd have to wade through three feet of guano to hang upside down with you in your cave. Don't count your chickens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cabotiger
He was originally appointed by George Bush dillweed. Just because you rule against Trump doesn't make you a radical leftist. Remember how you raged about radical leftist judge Tanya Chutkan before she ruled FOR Trump in the end?
Again, you should stay away from intellectual discussions but ironic that you called him dillweed. LOL
 
Again, you should stay away from intellectual discussions but ironic that you called him dillweed. LOL
You and "intellectual" discussions is the funniest shit I've heard all year. Hilarious that you think you're intelligent. I assure you it doesn't show. Now quit destroying the board with your constant need to insult people because you have no self-esteem.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Cabotiger
You and "intellectual" discussions is the funniest shit I've heard all year. Hilarious that you think you're intelligent. I assure you it doesn't show. Now quit destroying the board with your constant need to insult people because you have no self-esteem.
You're a UofSC grad, unintelligent cock fan, stfu

You need to leave TI all together because you actually never post on the REAL board because you're a liberal tard that never played sports and can't talk sports intellectually. So gfy

You are a joke and one of the most hated posters on this board besides @okclem who fortunately is gone after 4 bans so hopefully you're next.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Allornothing
You're a UofSC grad, unintelligent cock fan, stfu

You need to leave TI all together because you actually never post on the REAL board because you're a liberal tard that never played sports and can't talk sports intellectually. So gfy

You are a joke and one of the most hated posters on this board besides @okclem who fortunately is gone after 4 bans so hopefully you're next.
You're a UofSC grad, unintelligent cock fan. This explains everything!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
A deep web here. @dpic73

This character goes all the way back to Russiagate.



Now isn’t this interesting

Republicans have been calling to impeach multiple federal judges for weeks, but Chief Justice Roberts only decided to speak up when Judge Boasberg was being targeted

What a “coincidence” that CJ Roberts appointed Boasberg to the same FISA court that authorized illegal spying on President Trump

Looks like CJ Robert is protecting his corrupt friend!

===

Chief Justice John Roberts doesn't like Trump demanding the removal of DC Judge Boasberg from the bench b/c it was Roberts who made the (ill-advised) decision to appoint Boasberg to a 7-year term on the corrupt FISA Court that rubber-stamped Comey & McCabe's FISAs to spy on Trump
 
  • Like
Reactions: Allornothing


Chuck Schumer admits the quiet part out loud— Democrat-appointed judges are really activists who are there to stop Trump:

"We did put 235 judges, progressive judges, judges not under the control of Trump, last year on the bench, and they are ruling against Trump time after time after time."
 
A deep web here. @dpic73

This character goes all the way back to Russiagate.



Now isn’t this interesting

Republicans have been calling to impeach multiple federal judges for weeks, but Chief Justice Roberts only decided to speak up when Judge Boasberg was being targeted

What a “coincidence” that CJ Roberts appointed Boasberg to the same FISA court that authorized illegal spying on President Trump

Looks like CJ Robert is protecting his corrupt friend!

===

Chief Justice John Roberts doesn't like Trump demanding the removal of DC Judge Boasberg from the bench b/c it was Roberts who made the (ill-advised) decision to appoint Boasberg to a 7-year term on the corrupt FISA Court that rubber-stamped Comey & McCabe's FISAs to spy on Trump
Things like this make me think back to when Trump said, "we caught them all". Obviously I don't like what is happening with these nationwide injunctions, but I'm just wondering if things like this are a trap to compound the evidence. All the people around POTUS had to know that these judges were going to do this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
Things like this make me think back to when Trump said, "we caught them all". Obviously I don't like what is happening with these nationwide injunctions, but I'm just wondering if things like this are a trap to compound the evidence. All the people around POTUS had to know that these judges were going to do this.
I totally agree brother. The Trump team is very well prepared for all moves in this game and I think some very good things for America are coming up in the future related to this never ending battle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Allornothing
I have to believe this is one of the most clueless responses to immigration policy’s yet.
They have been getting healthcare and benefits upon arrival.
Dems like AoC have been protecting illegals, illegally and now mayor of Boston included
Dems wanted more “lawyers” to protect illegals and guess where that money comes from?

US Tax payers……… I know you libs hate Doge and what Elon is finding but suck it up buttercup, you can’t print money without accountability forever.
**** are you guys dumb 🤦‍♂️
None of this is accurate wrt benefits and HC, but I wouldn’t expect a realtor living in Mexico’s Myrtle beach to understand that
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT