We all know that at least one non-illegal will be mistakenly detained or arrested in the massive deportation effort. Imperfections happen.
As I said earlier, I (and probably all citizens) would produce our proof of citizenship pdq were I to be mistakenly arrested.
Yet the burden of proof somehow must remain on the government within the interior of the country. The border is different, and rightly so, where each individual should provide proof of legal justification before being allowed in
Name one country where they are responsible to prove you belong inside their border?
It's you who must provide proof you belong anywhere.
Also, I strongly disagree with the notion that anyone is going to be deported illegally. Why must this be a fact?
If 3rd world countries can figure out who are there illegally, surely the richest country in the history of the world can figure it out.
Name one country where they [government] are responsible to prove you committed a crime, rather than the suspect having to prove they did not commit the crime?
Isn't that the USA? Doesn't the US Constitution provide no person will be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process?
I am not saying we must have a court trial for every suspected illegal alien. But we must provide a process wherein a person could contest deportation if he/she is actually legally here. So that would be citizens and green card legal residents. What would that process be? Idk, but if it isn't properly crafted then the asshole leftists will use it to meke deportation impossible.
Were you, sooma, to be incorrectly scooped up by ICE, you specifically do have a Constitutional right to due process as a citizen before being flown to a foreign jail or launched by trebuchet across the Rio Grande. Yes?
You don't believe anyone will be mistakenly deported among the tens of millions of illegals we will be trying to find? You believe that the people and systems we have are infallible and will never detain the wrong person? Mistaken identity will never happen? Databases will be perfectly accurate?
April 28, 2025, 09:02 AM
Fly-Sig
quote:
Originally posted by Bytes:
quote:
Originally posted by Fly-Sig: Yet the burden of proof somehow must remain on the government within the interior of the country. The border is different, and rightly so, where each individual should provide proof of legal justification before being allowed in
Explain to me where the border actually is. Is it the actual border separating the countries or could it be at the airport in Omaha. Last I checked Omaha would very much be in the interior of the country. The wife and I used to fly to Cancun once a year. We would depart from and arrive at Salt Lake City. We always proved our citizenship both in Mexico and the US and never hit a "border" check point.
Perhaps a lawyer could refine where the border is relative to a Port of Entry. Do we really need to parse and split these hairs?
Until you are allowed past the immigration booth in the airport, you are not lawfully in the country. You are physically inside the country, but not lawfully yet. ICE can refuse you entry if you cannot prove you meet the requirements such as citizenship.
Now after they wave you in and you're sitting in Starbucks waiting for your connecting flight, you have every Constitutional protection. You cannot be summarily jailed nor deported without due process. ICE cannot legally grab you and put you on a flight to a Venezuelan jail without you first having due process.
April 28, 2025, 09:07 AM
a1abdj
quote:
But we must provide a process wherein a person could contest deportation if he/she is actually legally here. So that would be citizens and green card legal residents. What would that process be?
This process already exists. It's called "showing your ID", which is then verified. Can usually be done within a matter of seconds right on the side of the road.
But we must provide a process wherein a person could contest deportation if he/she is actually legally here. So that would be citizens and green card legal residents. What would that process be?
This process already exists. It's called "showing your ID", which is then verified. Can usually be done within a matter of seconds right on the side of the road.
I don't disagree with the sentiment, but it greatly bothers my view of our Constitutional rights on the side of the road. And, yes, I would certainly whip out my Real ID or passport immediately so that I could continue with my life. But I would be furious about "Show your papers!".
It seems much like being jailed indefinitely unless I can prove I didn't rob the liquor store. Deportation is no minor thing to do to a person.
Imagine you, as a citizen, said, "Nope, you the government must prove I did that crime before you deprive me of my liberty". Why is robbery any different than coming into the country illegally? Both are crimes. You have rights.
I don't disagree with the sentiment, but it greatly bothers my view of our Constitutional rights on the side of the road. And, yes, I would certainly whip out my Real ID or passport immediately so that I could continue with my life. But I would be furious about "Show your papers!".
It seems much like being jailed indefinitely unless I can prove I didn't rob the liquor store. Deportation is no minor thing to do to a person.
Imagine you, as a citizen, said, "Nope, you the government must prove I did that crime before you deprive me of my liberty". Why is robbery any different than coming into the country illegally? Both are crimes. You have rights.
No ID?
How hard is that?
I understand you think everyone of these illegal criminal aliens should all go to trial and we have to PROVE they are illegal. It's absurd and will effectively negate all immigration law effectiveness. Previously we let them in, asked them nicely to go to court, then let them go and THEY NEVER SHOWED UP. Any deportation from there effectively completes the due process. If anyone (legal or otherwise) is arrested say for any other crime ~ an identity is established and they go from there. I would imagine a substantial amount of them are in the category of skipping their hearing/trial >>> DEPORT is fully justified.
GOTTA GO.
April 28, 2025, 10:30 AM
Rick Lee
Living in AZ and making plenty of trips along I-8 to CA and back, I have driven through countless BP checkpoints. Mrs. Lee is Chinese and, even when she's been with me, we've never once been asked for ID. BP knows who they're looking for.
April 28, 2025, 10:40 AM
Pipe Smoker
You folks ought to relax. The Trump administration is now in charge of border security.
Serious about crackers.
April 28, 2025, 11:00 AM
a1abdj
quote:
Imagine you, as a citizen, said, "Nope, you the government must prove I did that crime before you deprive me of my liberty". Why is robbery any different than coming into the country illegally? Both are crimes. You have rights.
I gave this example previously.
Imagine you as a citizen are up at Walmart when for whatever reason the manager has called the police and informed them than you were trespassing.
You then say "Nope, you the government must prove I'm not Sam Walton before you remove me from the property". Do you get to remain inside of Walmart until after your court hearing?
Why is trespassing inside Walmart different than trespassing inside the US?
If you really are Sam Walton, you can whip out your ID on the spot and then fire the manager. No need for it to go to court. If you really are a US citizen you can easily prove that as well. Courts don't need to be involved.
Being returned to the country of which you are a citizen is not depriving you of any rights or taking away any of your liberties.
I understand you think everyone of these illegal criminal aliens should all go to trial and we have to PROVE they are illegal. It's absurd and will effectively negate all immigration law effectiveness.
No, that is not at all what I said. I said the following:
1) There must be a process available for those who have a legitimate claim that they are here legally. i.e. Citizens or green card residents must have a way to not be whisked away to a foreign jail or dumped across the border into Mexico. I have no doubt that at least one person will be wrongly detained due to error.
2) While due process is a Constitutional requirement, it need not be a trial. It could be as simple an appearance in front of an official. Only those who contest their deportation would get this procedure, while the remainder would be accepting deportation.
3) I believe we citizens would all choose to present our Real ID or passport immediately so as to avoid the pain of detention.
4) I am troubled by the concept that we have to prove our innocence first or that there would be no due process available prior to deportation. Just as, I hope, you would be troubled by having to prove your innocence or possibly even have no due process before being incarcerated for, say, insurrection on Jan 6.
5) Any due process procedure will be open to abuse. If every one of the millions of illegals demands a hearing to prove their innocence, the system is fucked. So the process needs to be really airtight somehow. The Dems are proven to do everything possible to keep the illegals here. Yet, not allowing due process is a seriously terrible precedent.
As an addition, in my life I've experienced a major state database error which caused me some grief, and a malicious prosecution by my Favorite Aviation Administration which would have been a career ender. The latter cost me two years gross pay in legal fees before the court agreed the prosecutor had falsified a document. Up until then it didn't matter one bit that their complaint against me actually proved my innocence. The complaint was a violation of aircraft limitations via exceeding a max demonstrated number. Max demonstrated is not a limitation, as established by Federal Regulation as well as many court precedents. The judge didn't care, even though both AOPA and ALPA supported my case. And lest you think I was a hot-shot who pushed things for grins, the exceedance was caused by a mechanical failure, and the airline praised both me and the Captain for saving the aircraft without any injuries or bending any metal.
April 28, 2025, 12:54 PM
Fly-Sig
quote:
Originally posted by a1abdj:
quote:
Imagine you, as a citizen, said, "Nope, you the government must prove I did that crime before you deprive me of my liberty". Why is robbery any different than coming into the country illegally? Both are crimes. You have rights.
I gave this example previously.
Imagine you as a citizen are up at Walmart when for whatever reason the manager has called the police and informed them than you were trespassing.
You then say "Nope, you the government must prove I'm not Sam Walton before you remove me from the property". Do you get to remain inside of Walmart until after your court hearing?
Why is trespassing inside Walmart different than trespassing inside the US?
If you really are Sam Walton, you can whip out your ID on the spot and then fire the manager. No need for it to go to court. If you really are a US citizen you can easily prove that as well. Courts don't need to be involved.
Being returned to the country of which you are a citizen is not depriving you of any rights or taking away any of your liberties.
Here's where you're wrong.
When the manager calls the police they are responding to a complaint, but they are not adjudicators. They are there to determine if a crime may have occurred and if there is sufficient reason to arrest someone for it.
If I'm unwilling to provide any documentation of my claim, they have reason to arrest me.
Now we go to court. This is a trivial case but the state still must prove I was trespassing in order to convict me and apply a penalty. The state provides the manager's statement of what happened. If I insist I am Sam Walton, the state actually does have to prove I am not. Right? To the satisfaction of the judge or the jury. I might choose to help my defense by providing documentation, but I don't have to. If I don't, the state has the onus on them to show I am not Sam.
In this example the state will easily prevail, yet I have the right to the due process.
What can't happen is the police throwing me in prison on their own declaration that I am guilty. This is exactly the same as ICE picking someone up and deporting them, without any opportunity for the person to contest it.
April 28, 2025, 12:56 PM
PASig
So the Philadelphia Eagles will be visiting President Trump today in the WH for winning the Super Bowl and there's a whole lot of people in Philly angry about that.
Saquon Barkley, easily one of the team's best players basically told them all to grow up and shut up:
Originally posted by PASig: So the Philadelphia Eagles will be visiting President Trump today in the WH for winning the Super Bowl and there's a whole lot of people in Philly angry about that.
I'll bet most Phillie fans are positive on the team's visit to the White House. I am sure that President Trump would receive overwhelming cheers if he visited an Eagles game in Phillie. The negative ones just have big mouths online.
And I applaud Saquon Barkley for having the good sense to honor the office and the moment, and the backbone to tell people to grow up.
.
April 28, 2025, 01:40 PM
a1abdj
quote:
What can't happen is the police throwing me in prison on their own declaration that I am guilty. This is exactly the same as ICE picking someone up and deporting them, without any opportunity for the person to contest it.
We aren't putting illegals in prison. We are returning them to the nation where they have citizenship. And just like you would have the opportunity to make your argument AFTER you were removed from Walmart, illegals can make their argument AFTER they have been removed to their country.
And in both cases one can EASILY prove whether they are legally within a Walmart, or the US. The only people who can't prove that quickly and on the spot aren't there legally. Do you know anybody who couldn't prove they are a US citizen on request? And even if they couldn't right there on the spot, you don't think that the government doesn't have access to the data that could?
I'm confident that the number of those legally here caught up in any of this would be an extremely small percentage.
1) There must be a process available for those who have a legitimate claim that they are here legally. i.e. Citizens or green card residents must have a way to not be whisked away to a foreign jail or dumped across the border into Mexico. I have no doubt that at least one person will be wrongly detained due to error.
Millions were deported by Bush, Clinton, Obama, without due process why is it now required, nobody cared about due process for 25+ million deported over the last 20+ years without
Other than Maryland Man, who is simply being used by the left, and who is clearly MS-13, where are all the legal green card holders, unexpired visas, who are legitimately in the USA being "whisked away", "dumped over the border"? Haven't seen any reports, then again I don't watch MSNBC or CNN.
quote:
2) While due process is a Constitutional requirement, it need not be a trial. It could be as simple an appearance in front of an official. Only those who contest their deportation would get this procedure, while the remainder would be accepting deportation.
Why Is this necessary now, and why was it not for the past quarter century at a minimum. How did the courts ignore Due Process, including SCOTUS, District courts, congress, the news, ACLA for all of history, until Trump...
Do we now need to bring back all of the deportees who didn't get due process, where does it end,
The next D will cancel all of Trumps EO's (yes) and open the border, allowing more illegal entrants in who can't be deported, since SCOTUS ruled that Biden had complete control of immigration, and they will all claim Habeas...
This isn't about people wanting to come to the US and make a better life, its all about changing the population of the US for political control, one could say it's a Civil war not with two armed groups fighting but one party manipulating the voting bloc of the US in order to take control of the government for centuries, and, its paid for by insurrectionist like Soros, ActBlue and also funded by cartels and foreign governments who are sending criminals, gang members, drug mules etc.
There is no reason for due process with these deportations, other than to appease the left and the press...
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed questions on the judiciary during a Monday morning briefing, calling out judges who let the Biden administration allow in nearly 10 million illegal immigrants, in violation of US laws, without pushback. In response to a question from Rogan O'Handley, aka DC Draino in the new media seat, Leavitt said, "It is absurd that the previous administration was allowed to allow 15 million—that we know about—illegal aliens into this country with very little pushback from our judicial branch."
Two judges were arrested last week for essentially interfering with ICE actions for deportations. A New Mexico judge, who had resigned ahead of the arrest, was accused of tampering with evidence in an attempt to prevent law enforcement from gaining evidence to aid their deportation of suspected Tren de Aragua gang members living on the judge's property. In Milwaukee, a judge was arrested after law enforcement witnessed her leading a defendant out of her courtroom during a pre-trial hearing in an attempt to evade ICE arrest.
"This president is trying to simply enforce our nation's immigration laws and is facing roadblock after roadblock so we're complying with court orders," Leavitt said, going on to say that the administration is "going to continue to forge ahead with this mass deportation campaign."
Border czar Tom Homan spoke to the issue of the judiciary as well, and noted the arrest of the two judges. "I said from day one: you don't have to support ICE operations. You can support sanctuary cities, if that's what you desire to do," he said. But he emphasized that this does not mean officials should impede ICE operations.
"We're targeting public safety threats and national security threats. I can't believe there's any elected officials, especially a judge, that doesn't believe we should be doing that. And they should be helping us," he said. "What I said on day one: you can sit aside and watch. Again, you can argue against us all you want and protest all you want. But when you cross that line... to impediment, or knowingly harboring, concealing an illegal alien from ICE, you will be prosecuted, judge or not."
"You guys arrested a Milwaukee County Circuit Judge for allegedly helping illegal immigrants get away. As you guys look at other judges, would you ever arrest somebody higher up on the judicial food chain, like a federal judge or even a Supreme Court justice?" asked Fox News' Peter Doocy. Leavitt indicated that they would be arrested if they violated the law.
"She obstructed federal law enforcement who were looking for an illegal alien in her courthouse," Leavitt said, detailing the charges against the Milwaukee judge. "She showed that illegal alien the door to evade law enforcement officials. That is a clear-cut case of obstruction. You don't have to be a lawyer to understand that. And so anyone who is breaking the law or obstructing federal law enforcement officials from doing their jobs is putting their selves at risk of being prosecuted, absolutely."
And a brutal question from the New Media Seat at the WH presser today.
Nice is overrated
"It's every freedom-loving individual's duty to lie to the government." Airsoftguy, June 29, 2018
April 28, 2025, 02:37 PM
Fly-Sig
quote:
Originally posted by a1abdj:
quote:
What can't happen is the police throwing me in prison on their own declaration that I am guilty. This is exactly the same as ICE picking someone up and deporting them, without any opportunity for the person to contest it.
We aren't putting illegals in prison. We are returning them to the nation where they have citizenship. And just like you would have the opportunity to make your argument AFTER you were removed from Walmart, illegals can make their argument AFTER they have been removed to their country. . . . I'm confident that the number of those legally here caught up in any of this would be an extremely small percentage.
Wow, so you're ok with police picking someone up and deporting them, just because the police decide to. And that small percentage mistakenly picked up who is legally here, perhaps even you or one of your family, once they arrive in a prison in Venezuela or El Salvador they can try to prove they actually are a citizen or legal resident of the USA?
That is nothing like me being arrested in Wal-Mart and then having my day in court prior to being imprisoned or fined. The equivalent to your scenario is me first being sentenced by the police to 6 months in prison and $10,000 fine, after which I can try to prove my innocence.
Do you not see the difference?
You advocate a police state with no due process. That's all fine and dandy when it is a violent gang member illegally here, but when the same concept is applied to, for example, protestors in DC, well then it isn't so good is it? Or perhaps gun owners could have their weapons confiscated or their children removed by the state for the public good, after which we could try to prove our worthiness to get our property and children back?
I am really dismayed that people here are ok with that.
April 28, 2025, 02:37 PM
LS1 GTO
quote:
Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
quote:
Originally posted by a1abdj:
This process already exists. It's called "showing your ID", which is then verified. Can usually be done within a matter of seconds right on the side of the road.
I don't disagree with the sentiment, but it greatly bothers my view of our Constitutional rights on the side of the road. And, yes, I would certainly whip out my Real ID or passport immediately so that I could continue with my life. But I would be furious about "Show your papers!".
It seems much like being jailed indefinitely unless I can prove I didn't rob the liquor store. Deportation is no minor thing to do to a person.
Imagine you, as a citizen, said, "Nope, you the government must prove I did that crime before you deprive me of my liberty". Why is robbery any different than coming into the country illegally? Both are crimes. You have rights.
The Legislative Branch (Congress) makes the laws. The Executive Branch (President) enforces them. The Judicial Branch (SCOTUS) judges interprets the laws and judges if someone broke them.
Real ID was something from two decades ago, we now have a President who is enforcing it. Easy peazy.
Members of Congress needs to keep their cock holsters sealed or, change the law.
Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.
"If dogs don't go to Heaven, I want to go where they go" Will Rogers
The definition of the words we used, carry a meaning of their own...
