Margot Cleveland in the Federalist article " The Courts Are The Scofflaws Behind Our Current Constitutional Crisis" gives an analysis on where this issue stands. Citing Marbury v. Madison points out that SCOTUS lacked original jurisdiction in issuing the midnight order.

Saying in part;

Quote:

---

Like the Fifth Circuit, the Supreme Court sits as a court of review, other than in limited circumstances not applicable here. Yet, seven justices ignored their limited jurisdiction and entered the order barring removals of illegal aliens under the proclamation. The Supreme Court's order was equally troubling because the high court provided a remedy to a non-existent class.

---

https://thefederalist.com/2025/04/22/the-courts-are-the-scofflaws-behind-our-current-constitutional-crisis/

I believe the majority of American CITIZENS would support a process for deportation that provides different levels of "due process" based on fact circumstances of the alien.

If you arrived in this Country via unlawful means and are over 14, you get deported. The only thing that must me confirmed is your age and how you came to be in the United States. No consideration outside of those circumstances can be considered by an immigration judge, ICE or any other judge/ court and so on.

Next bucket would be those here having arrived by lawful means such a student / work visa, tourist overstaying, Biden flights, and such get an expedited hearing with an immigration judge. Only thing that should be on deck here is whether the correct law was applied for deportation. But the entirety of this process should remain under the Executive. Securing our borders and our citizens is an Executive function and we have plenty of well-established laws here. Judiciary should stay the f out of the way.

Valid green card holders and US citizens can get standard due process, whatever the hell that means.

I agree with the above the "persons" was used to cover the fact that when those old docs were written the concept of what makes a citizen of the United States was a bit undefined given existing residents (Indians and such) and folks who found themselves here against their will (slaves) and those who had no intention of being anything other than a new world explorer and wanted to keep their allegiance to their sovereign homeland.

Looking at it 250 years later and applying the term "persons" to mean anyone including enemy combatants who invaded our Country does not seem to be the intent of the Founding Fathers.

2040huck said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

The time for "Due Process" was when they wanted to come here. If they subverted that, they forfeited their right to any due process related to expulsion in my opinion.

---

What about those who came in and applied for asylum? Do you think they are here "illegally"? Are they entitled to due process?

---

Parole under the immigration law REQUIRED individual assessments of every person.

The Biden admin did a blanket parole (which was a violation of the law you care so much about).

Most of these people technically aren't here legally because of that...

The Supreme Court of the United States, which holds a 6-3 conservative majority, ruled on this 7-2. Are y'all saying it's ok to completely ignore a Supreme Court ruling when the result doesn't go your way, even when four conservative justices ruled against you? C'mon man…

Who is ignoring the Supreme Court?

The 7 Supreme Court Justices, including the 4 "conservative" judges are clearly more concerned with appearing, fair, kind, compassionate, and sympathetic than eliminating crimes committed by illegal aliens.

Aggie Dad Sip said:

---

The Supreme Court of the United States, which holds a 6-3 conservative majority, ruled on this 7-2. Are y'all saying it's ok to completely ignore a Supreme Court ruling when the result doesn't go your way, even when four conservative justices ruled against you? C'mon man…

---

They didn't "rule" on anything; they issued an order, and it's temporary. You're assuming they're infallible which they aren't. Ipse dixit is the fallacy at work here. I assure you as an attorney for nearly 2 decades, there is zero basis for them issuing this order. None. That's why you haven't seen them issue anything supporting it , while Alito and Thomas outlined their dissent clearly and immediately. They had zero jurisdiction to issue anything in this case.

Al Gore is still getting quoted? It's been years (decades?) since he's had anything relevant to add to the conversation.

agent-maroon said:

---

Al Gore is still getting quoted? It's been years (decades?) since he's had anything relevant to add to the conversation.

---

Was he ever relevant?

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

agent-maroon said:

---

Al Gore is still getting quoted? It's been years (decades?) since he's had anything relevant to add to the conversation.

---

Was he ever relevant?

---

Hey!

He DID invent the internet!!!!

Someone paid him to spew his idiocy for Earth Day yesterday. He's an expert on nothing but profiteering off of government-related schemes. He's a detestable fool.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Time for Trump to pull a Biden and ignore this SC ruling.

---

Explain what ruling Biden ignored.

---

Student loans

He used other programs that weren't subject to SCOTUS' decision.

HTownAg98 said:

---

He used other programs that weren't subject to SCOTUS' decision.

---

Obama ignored Supreme Court rulings. Have any opinions on those? Oh…right… you don't know anything about this because the sole source of your "knowledge" never mentioned them.

TAMU1990 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Time for Trump to pull a Biden and ignore this SC ruling.

---

Explain what ruling Biden ignored.

---

Student loans

---

Zombie lie.

The court told Biden he could not do something because a certain law didn't allow it. Biden didn't do the thing, and instead tried to achieve a smaller version of the same goal by using a different law, to see if that law would allow it. The courts said it couldn't do that, either, and so he didn't. Nothing about that is unusual and it is not 'ignoring' the courts.

There's one important thing to note here, though. Almost every time the Biden canceled student loan debt under the existing programs - which no courts ever stopped and which had nothing to do with the actions struck down by the Supreme Court - the president would send tweets like this:

The Supreme Court tried to block me from relieving student debt. But they didn't stop me. I've relieved student debt for over 5 million Americans. I'm going to keep going.

That tweet has been used in multiple attempts to argue that Biden had ignored an order from the court. He did not.

rgvag11 said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Time for Trump to pull a Biden and ignore this SC ruling.

---

Explain what ruling Biden ignored.

---

Student loans

---

Zombie lie.

The court told Biden he could not do something because a certain law didn't allow it. Biden didn't do the thing, and instead tried to achieve a smaller version of the same goal by using a different law, to see if that law would allow it. The courts said it couldn't do that, either, and so he didn't. Nothing about that is unusual and it is not 'ignoring' the courts.

There's one important thing to note here, though. Almost every time the Biden canceled student loan debt under the existing programs - which no courts ever stopped and which had nothing to do with the actions struck down by the Supreme Court - the president would send tweets like this:

The Supreme Court tried to block me from relieving student debt. But they didn't stop me. I've relieved student debt for over 5 million Americans. I'm going to keep going.

That tweet has been used in multiple attempts to argue that Biden had ignored an order from the court. He did not.

---

Great, now address the times Obama ignored the Supreme Court.

And tell us all, again, which Supreme Court ruling(s) or order(s) the Trump administration has ignored?

rgvag11 said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Time for Trump to pull a Biden and ignore this SC ruling.

---

Explain what ruling Biden ignored.

---

Student loans

---

Zombie lie.

The court told Biden he could not do something because a certain law didn't allow it. Biden didn't do the thing, and instead tried to achieve a smaller version of the same goal by using a different law, to see if that law would allow it. The courts said it couldn't do that, either, and so he didn't. Nothing about that is unusual and it is not 'ignoring' the courts.

There's one important thing to note here, though. Almost every time the Biden canceled student loan debt under the existing programs - which no courts ever stopped and which had nothing to do with the actions struck down by the Supreme Court - the president would send tweets like this:

The Supreme Court tried to block me from relieving student debt. But they didn't stop me. I've relieved student debt for over 5 million Americans. I'm going to keep going.

That tweet has been used in multiple attempts to argue that Biden had ignored an order from the court. He did not.

---

Well, he sure lied a lot then!

Obama never defied an order from the Supreme Court.

Trump has not complied with the Supreme Court's order to return Abrego Garcia, yet.

Notice how none of these leftists will address how Biden abrogated his constitutional duty to protect our borders by failing to enforce the law elected Congress passed on behalf of its citizens resulting in countless crimes and death. They're soooooo concerned about a gangbanging wife beating illegal piece of **** though.

I can't imagine they'd say a word to Jocelyn Narangeli's mother about any of this because they're pathetic cowards.

rgvag11 said:

---

Obama never defied an order from the Supreme Court.

Trump has not complied with the Supreme Court's order to return Abrego Garcia, yet.

---

This is a lie, words have meaning, and those have been fulfilled. He is able to fly in if he wants

I hope he does because then ICE can deport him again

rgvag11 said:

---

Obama never defied an order from the Supreme Court.

Trump has not complied with the Supreme Court's order to return Abrego Garcia, yet.

---

Maybe because the Supreme Court never ordered Trump to do anything of the sort.

rgvag11 said:

---

Obama never defied an order from the Supreme Court.

Trump has not complied with the Supreme Court's order to return Abrego Garcia, yet.

---

Yes, he did.

https://www.cato.org/blog/obama-administration-ignores-supreme-court-encourages-racial-preferences

How has Trump not complied with the Court's order? What was the order? You don't know.

rgvag11 said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Time for Trump to pull a Biden and ignore this SC ruling.

---

Explain what ruling Biden ignored.

---

Student loans

---

Zombie lie.

The court told Biden he could not do something because a certain law didn't allow it. Biden didn't do the thing, and instead tried to achieve a smaller version of the same goal by using a different law, to see if that law would allow it. The courts said it couldn't do that, either, and so he didn't. Nothing about that is unusual and it is not 'ignoring' the courts.

There's one important thing to note here, though. Almost every time the Biden canceled student loan debt under the existing programs - which no courts ever stopped and which had nothing to do with the actions struck down by the Supreme Court - the president would send tweets like this:

The Supreme Court tried to block me from relieving student debt. But they didn't stop me. I've relieved student debt for over 5 million Americans. I'm going to keep going.

That tweet has been used in multiple attempts to argue that Biden had ignored an order from the court. He did not.

---

So he just lied to everyone so he could capture votes.

Jack Boyette said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

He used other programs that weren't subject to SCOTUS' decision.

---

Obama ignored Supreme Court rulings. Have any opinions on those? Oh…right… you don't know anything about this because the sole source of your "knowledge" never mentioned them.

---

That's because Obama didn't ignore a SCOTUS order that I'm aware of. If you know of one, show your receipts, instead of just throwing out a baseless accusation without any proof.

rgvag11 said:

---

Obama never defied an order from the Supreme Court.

Trump has not complied with the Supreme Court's order to return Abrego Garcia, yet.

---

So, his giving the cartels a bunch of guns was cool because the Supreme Court never told him not to?

Don't act like this is about principles. The side you support is beyond lacking.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Jack Boyette said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

He used other programs that weren't subject to SCOTUS' decision.

---

Obama ignored Supreme Court rulings. Have any opinions on those? Oh…right… you don't know anything about this because the sole source of your "knowledge" never mentioned them.

---

That's because Obama didn't ignore a SCOTUS order that I'm aware of. If you know of one, show your receipts, instead of just throwing out a baseless accusation without any proof.

---

I just did. "That you're aware of." LOL. You don't seem to be aware of much, hence you actually believing Trump
was ordered to return that scumbag.

Here's Biden ignoring the Court as well. Didn't hear anything about this one either huh? Gee…I wonder why?

https://www.michiganfarmnews.com/biden-admin-epa-defy-supreme-court-ruling-on-water-regulations

SC is definitely not going to allow Trump to continue especially since his remark of we cant deport people if they want "Due Process", the administration needs to start on legislation that has "iron in the glove" approach and take on the road for remainder of his presidency.

To be fair, I don't think Biden was ever really cognizant of anything he said during his term.

Jack Boyette said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Jack Boyette said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

He used other programs that weren't subject to SCOTUS' decision.

---

Obama ignored Supreme Court rulings. Have any opinions on those? Oh…right… you don't know anything about this because the sole source of your "knowledge" never mentioned them.

---

That's because Obama didn't ignore a SCOTUS order that I'm aware of. If you know of one, show your receipts, instead of just throwing out a baseless accusation without any proof.

---

I just did. "That you're aware of." LOL. You don't seem to be aware of much, hence you actually believing Trump
was ordered to return that scumbag.

Here's Biden ignoring the Court as well. Didn't hear anything about this one either huh? Gee…I wonder why?

https://www.michiganfarmnews.com/biden-admin-epa-defy-supreme-court-ruling-on-water-regulations

---

If they were brazenly violating the order, one would think those parties would be seeking a contempt order from the court that has that case. I haven't seen one, have you? Just because some advocacy groups think they aren't following an order to the letter doesn't mean they aren't.

Doesn't SCOTUS just rule on whether a law or action is constitutional / unconstitutional?

As such, how can they ever tell or order the other branches to do a damn thing?

Answer: SCOTUS has ZERO as in NO authority to order the Executive to do something. In order to do so, one would have to have power or supremacy over the other. They DO NOT HAVE SUCH POWER OR SUPREMACY.

This concept still seems to be lost on such. Separate but EQUAL branches of government.

Article III of the US Constitution for reference:

Quote:

---

Article III
Article III Explained

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.

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.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Section 3
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.


The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

---

And a helpful graphic:

HTownAg98 said:

---

Jack Boyette said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Jack Boyette said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

He used other programs that weren't subject to SCOTUS' decision.

---

Obama ignored Supreme Court rulings. Have any opinions on those? Oh…right… you don't know anything about this because the sole source of your "knowledge" never mentioned them.

---

That's because Obama didn't ignore a SCOTUS order that I'm aware of. If you know of one, show your receipts, instead of just throwing out a baseless accusation without any proof.

---

I just did. "That you're aware of." LOL. You don't seem to be aware of much, hence you actually believing Trump
was ordered to return that scumbag.

Here's Biden ignoring the Court as well. Didn't hear anything about this one either huh? Gee…I wonder why?

https://www.michiganfarmnews.com/biden-admin-epa-defy-supreme-court-ruling-on-water-regulations

---

If they were brazenly violating the order, one would think those parties would be seeking a contempt order from the court that has that case. I haven't seen one, have you? Just because some advocacy groups think they aren't following an order to the letter doesn't mean they aren't.

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Jack Boyette said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Jack Boyette said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

He used other programs that weren't subject to SCOTUS' decision.

---

Obama ignored Supreme Court rulings. Have any opinions on those? Oh…right… you don't know anything about this because the sole source of your "knowledge" never mentioned them.

---

That's because Obama didn't ignore a SCOTUS order that I'm aware of. If you know of one, show your receipts, instead of just throwing out a baseless accusation without any proof.

---

I just did. "That you're aware of." LOL. You don't seem to be aware of much, hence you actually believing Trump
was ordered to return that scumbag.

Here's Biden ignoring the Court as well. Didn't hear anything about this one either huh? Gee…I wonder why?

https://www.michiganfarmnews.com/biden-admin-epa-defy-supreme-court-ruling-on-water-regulations

---

If they were brazenly violating the order, one would think those parties would be seeking a contempt order from the court that has that case. I haven't seen one, have you? Just because some advocacy groups think they aren't following an order to the letter doesn't mean they aren't.

---

Oh….do you have a contempt order by the Court in this case? Have you looked in that case? Is it your argument that a party seeking a contempt order proves they have a case?

"Just because some advocacy groups say…"

Who's arguing this case on behalf of Garcia again?