"War on Drugs"

Cartel members?

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

Public proclamation. Venezuela/maduro regime

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/invocation-of-the-alien-enemies-act-regarding-the-invasion-of-the-united-states-by-tren-de-aragua/

"1. I find and declare that TdA is perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States. TdA is undertaking hostile actions and conducting irregular warfare against the territory of the United States both directly and at the direction, clandestine or otherwise, of the Maduro regime in Venezuela"

---

I don't think there can be judicial review of the POTUS' powers in this area...

amercer said:

---

Who are we at war with? The lawn care guys?

---

Do you support Ukraine? I suspect this is a drive by post you won't actually join the discussion. But I'm here dawg

Ag with kids said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

Public proclamation. Venezuela/maduro regime

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/invocation-of-the-alien-enemies-act-regarding-the-invasion-of-the-united-states-by-tren-de-aragua/

"1. I find and declare that TdA is perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States. TdA is undertaking hostile actions and conducting irregular warfare against the territory of the United States both directly and at the direction, clandestine or otherwise, of the Maduro regime in Venezuela"

---

I don't think there can be judicial review of the POTUS' powers in this area...

---

And you would be in agreement with decades of law….

On that, there can't be. Boasberg will agree. He will stick to "judicial review of who is in TdA" as his way to stick his nose in it, relying on this footnote from the Ludecke v. Watkins SCOTUS case:

Quote:

---

The additional question as to whether the person restrained is in fact an alien enemy fourteen years of age or older may also be reviewed by the courts. See cases cited note 8 supra. This question is not raised in this case

---

I still believe deference to the president is necessary here, as you can tell for sure if someone is 14 or not. Whether someone is a "member" of TdA may not be as clear, so err on letting the president make that judgment

BMX Bandit said:

---

On that, there can't be. Boasberg will agree. He will stick to "judicial review of who is in TdA" as his way to stick his nose in it, relying on this footnote from the Ludecke v. Watkins SCOTUS case:

Quote:

---

The additional question as to whether the person restrained is in fact an alien enemy fourteen years of age or older may also be reviewed by the courts. See cases cited note 8 supra. This question is not raised in this case

---

I still believe deference to the president is necessary here, as you can tell for sure if someone is 14 or not. Whether someone is a "member" of TdA may not be as clear, so err on letting the president make that judgment

---

And This briefing by DOJ makes it seem that that issue has been dropped (at the suggestion of the court) in order to maintain jurisdiction because that issue would be in another court. Bottom of p 14 (can't cope/paste for some reason).

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cadc.41844/gov.uscourts.cadc.41844.01208720432.0.pdf

Correct. Trump argued that's a habeas argument, so must be brought where they are: Texas.

Cleveland isn't sure on that:

12/12 Also, I don't think I see this as "sounding in habeas" meaning it has to go to Texas. Plaintiffs aren't seeking release of these aliens but to prevent their deportation.

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 15, 2025

BMX Bandit said:

---

Trump is not going to claim the cartels or TdA is a "nation".

The "nation" here is Venezuela. The question is what does "any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened…" by that nation mean.

There's lots of wiggle room there, and courts should defer to President in determining what that means. As aggiehawg says, they won't.

But I bet the higher courts do.

---

The higher courts need to start ***** slapping these district courts that are making these TDS rulings...

Can they issue sanctions for how out of touch with the law they are?

Ag in Tiger Country said:

---

One thing occurred to me, since we have the "War on Drugs" & ".. on Terror" that were ordained by Congressional Resolutions albeit not a war declaration, what if those criminal aliens apprehended are deemed 'enemy combatants' of these Wars?

Presumably a "combatant" would include as a definition the giving of aid, comfort, & support to &/or furthering the interests of the enemy. Such an application could then apply to handing out terrorist propaganda &/or facilitating drugs, guns, & human smuggling that included the smuggling of known terrorists as a pretext to satisfy that designation.

Applying that definition could changes things in a big way irrespective of the Act at issue, & if deemed applicable, would open up GITMO for some new residents.

---

The saying Inter arma enim silent leges applies here. I don't think the dems are going to win on the PR of this either way. A big issue with the internment of Japanese were that some were US citizens and were legal immigrants. I don't think there's much sympathy here for people with gang affilliations and entered illegaly in the US right now.

Awesome reference.

It's a losing issue for the Dems for sure, but that hasn't stopped them once this year, and their partisans in black robes with gavels seem determined to make headlines just to 'stop Trump.' As usual, so I don't anticipate the law will fall silent, or rather, the lawless judges won't allow it to.

Exactly. This is a “lose-lose” proposition for SCOTUS.

POTUS has already said he won’t deport under AEA until appeals are resolved.

SCOTUS is likely to duck it on political question grounds as suggested by Ludecke, and not make an issue of whether the 3 flights were or were… https://t.co/Cr8XsAuDmD

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) March 17, 2025

My swag is that Boasberg will wind up retreating at least partially on this stuff once it is fully briefed. A nationwide injunction based on a sketchy Saturday zoom call was…stupid on his behalf, imho.

Kansas Kid said:

---

It will be interesting is to see how this board reacts when administration officials get struck down by the courts on some of their new rules, regulations, and interpretations after Chevron was thrown out by the Supreme Court (something most of us on F16 totally agreed with). It took a lot of power from the executive branch and gave it back to Congress saying they need to make clear laws regather than deferring to interpretations by the executive branch.

---

The President of the United State IS the Executive. He is not a pencil pusher who works in some agency somewhere. HE has the constitutional authority of the Executive.

rgvag11 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

The President of the United State IS the Executive. He is not a pencil pusher who works in some agency somewhere. HE has the constitutional authority of the Executive.

---

---

Let's bookmark this and compare it to your feelings when there is a Democrat at the head of the Executive.

---

The Constitution doesn't change.

Not that Joe Biden made any decisions other than when he would use his inside voice versus his outside voice.

hth

rgvag11 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

It will be interesting is to see how this board reacts when administration officials get struck down by the courts on some of their new rules, regulations, and interpretations after Chevron was thrown out by the Supreme Court (something most of us on F16 totally agreed with). It took a lot of power from the executive branch and gave it back to Congress saying they need to make clear laws regather than deferring to interpretations by the executive branch.

---

The President of the United State IS the Executive. He is not a pencil pusher who works in some agency somewhere. HE has the constitutional authority of the Executive.

---

Let's bookmark this and compare it to your feelings when there is a Democrat at the head of the Executive.

---

There were people here during the first Trump admin, not just libs and CMs but many of the respected legal beagles, who were absolutely critical of Trump's taking actions to maximize Executive authority.

Hell, the first impeachment hoax ended with the libs, MSM and even a few Rs saying Trump had no authority to call Zelensky and ask him about purported crimes.

So your point fails to launch.

flown-the-coop said:

---

rgvag11 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

It will be interesting is to see how this board reacts when administration officials get struck down by the courts on some of their new rules, regulations, and interpretations after Chevron was thrown out by the Supreme Court (something most of us on F16 totally agreed with). It took a lot of power from the executive branch and gave it back to Congress saying they need to make clear laws regather than deferring to interpretations by the executive branch.

---

The President of the United State IS the Executive. He is not a pencil pusher who works in some agency somewhere. HE has the constitutional authority of the Executive.

---

Let's bookmark this and compare it to your feelings when there is a Democrat at the head of the Executive.

---

There were people here during the first Trump admin, not just libs and CMs but many of the respected legal beagles, who were absolutely critical of Trump's taking actions to maximize Executive authority.

Hell, the first impeachment hoax ended with the libs, MSM and even a few Rs saying Trump had no authority to call Zelensky and ask him about purported crimes.

So your point fails to launch.

---

Not that many.

backintexas2013 said:

---

We just lived it for four years including dealing with the horrifically stupid vaccine mandate that sits still justify and think was the right thing to do.

---

Neither Trump nor Biden issued a vaccine mandate.

remove. not contributing to the derail.

Link their responses that have lots of stars then. Should be easy to find with so many available.

rgvag11 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

We just lived it for four years including dealing with the horrifically stupid vaccine mandate that sits still justify and think was the right thing to do.

---

Neither Trump nor Biden issued a vaccine mandate.

---

Biden did through OSHA. What are you talking about?

rgvag11 said:

---

Link their responses that have lots of stars then. Should be easy to find with so many available.

---

1) I'm one of them. This isn't expanding anything. He already had the power, as President, to deport rapey, murderous a-holes that were here illegally.

2) We can't go back that far, IIRC, due to the great purge.

backintexas2013 said:

---

rgvag11 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

We just lived it for four years including dealing with the horrifically stupid vaccine mandate that sits still justify and think was the right thing to do.

---

Neither Trump nor Biden issued a vaccine mandate.

---

Biden did through OSHA. What are you talking about?

---

The OSHA ETS did not mandate that people get the jab.

NEED DERAIL CLEAN UP ON PAGE 4!

flown-the-coop said:

---

rgvag11 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

It will be interesting is to see how this board reacts when administration officials get struck down by the courts on some of their new rules, regulations, and interpretations after Chevron was thrown out by the Supreme Court (something most of us on F16 totally agreed with). It took a lot of power from the executive branch and gave it back to Congress saying they need to make clear laws regather than deferring to interpretations by the executive branch.

---

The President of the United State IS the Executive. He is not a pencil pusher who works in some agency somewhere. HE has the constitutional authority of the Executive.

---

Let's bookmark this and compare it to your feelings when there is a Democrat at the head of the Executive.

---

There were people here during the first Trump admin, not just libs and CMs but many of the respected legal beagles, who were absolutely critical of Trump's taking actions to maximize Executive authority.

Hell, the first impeachment hoax ended with the libs, MSM and even a few Rs saying Trump had no authority to call Zelensky and ask him about purported crimes.

So your point fails to launch.

---

You remember legal beagles, but I remember legal eagles!

He looks sad. I don't think he approves of Coop's co-opting his name in his drivel.

hearing today at 4:00 EDT.

NEW: The ACLU has filed a response to the Trump admin's actions on Saturday, asking Judge Boasberg to order the government to officially acknowledge what they did. This would presumably form the basis for a motion to show cause for contempt or similar. https://t.co/wSZAy0c0sJ pic.twitter.com/zH3QL5f7Ji

— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) March 17, 2025

aggiehawg said:

---

So the ACLU is setting up a writ of mandamus ordering the Trump administration to do what? Begin extradition proceedings to bring back the TDA members in El Salvador?

---

Unfortunately and with great sadness, a prison riot with a devastating fire that will make it hard to identify the deceased, will spread through the horrid conditions at the El Salvadoran prison.

amercer said:

---

Who are we at war with? The lawn care guys?

---

NM.

smh

SA68AG said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

So the ACLU is setting up a writ of mandamus ordering the Trump administration to do what? Begin extradition proceedings to bring back the TDA members in El Salvador?

---

Unfortunately and with great sadness, a prison riot with a devastating fire that will make it hard to identify the deceased, will spread through the horrid conditions at the El Salvadoran prison.

---

Actually about 250 Venezuelans were shanked in the showers of the El Salvadoran prison.

It's being referred to as the Shower Shank Redemption.

---

Bravo sir