• T00l_shed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Except they ruled that they are at war with MS13, so he could lawfully be deported along with all the others.

    Whoa! Congress declared a state of war?

    Already explained - the illegal alien act

    Which, again, not at war.

    Incorrect. The stay really only happened because he is MS13 - it was given precisely because they concluded that MS13’s rival gang would seek him out and harm him if he was deported.

    Funny that, i thought ms13 were super dangerous, why would they not only stop him from being deported, but also let him be free,

    • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Congress declared a state of war?

      Alien Enemies Act. Google it.

      Which, again, not at war.

      Alien Enemies Act. Google it.

      why would they not only stop him from being deported

      Because activist judges.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          It requires a declaration of war. Only Congress can do that.

          It does not. As I suggested to the other person - Google it. It does not require a declaration of war:

          “The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 allows the U.S. President to detain or deport individuals from enemy nations during wartime or in response to threats against the U.S.

          Furthermore, people being legally deported under that act have protections

          Which of the protections you linked to do you think were not followed? Here they are from your own link:

          “When an alien who becomes liable as an enemy, in the manner prescribed in section 21 of this title, is not chargeable with actual hostility, or other crime against the public safety, he shall be allowed, for the recovery, disposal, and removal of his goods and effects, and for his departure, the full time which is or shall be stipulated by any treaty then in force between the United States and the hostile nation or government of which he is a native citizen, denizen, or subject; and where no such treaty exists, or is in force, the President may ascertain and declare such reasonable time as may be consistent with the public safety, and according to the dictates of humanity and national hospitality.”

          What treaty is in force between the United States and El Salvador? What does it state? If no such treaty exists, the President decides.

          So, this is all illegal, and you need to read up on things you no nothing about.

          The irony is just so, so delicious.

          • JonsJava@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Can you read?

            The actual text, from the beginning:

            Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government

            Don’t come at me with opinions of meaning. I gave you the actual text.

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 hours ago

              What exactly do you think in the bit you highlighted proves you right?

              Can you read?

              I’m asking myself the same thing about you based on this conversation.

              • JonsJava@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                Let’s say that the trump admin is deporting gangs. Cool. Gangs are NOT NATIONS OR GOVERNMENTS.

                love how you ignored the protections and jurisdictions bit…

                Your still wrong.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  Explain how your Mental gymnastics is twisting the literal text into something it’s not, and I’ll apologize. Give me a line by line of the actual text, not an interpretation. I came with facts. You’ve come with feelings.

                  Your entire point is based on the fact that only congress can declare war, and the act can only be invoked during war.

                  That point is 100% incorrect, as shown by your own links. Your own links say it can also be invoked during an invasion, and that an invasion can be declared by the President.

                  I haven’t come with “feelings”, I’ve come with facts - fact that you have also provided but misunderstood.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  Ugh “max comment depth”…response to your NEXT comment is here:

                  Huh? I literally just responded to your comment:

                  Gangs are NOT NATIONS OR GOVERNMENTS

                  to point out that the act is allowed to be invoked when there is an invasion or predatory incursion coming from a foreign nation. I was pointing out where your point is wrong…and you then start talking about planes full of migrants?

                  Love the choice of language too - “migrants” rather than what they all are, which is “illegal immigrants”. “without due process” has already been explained - the act that we’re talking about means that a different “due process” is now in play, one which they did follow.

                  • JonsJava@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    5 hours ago

                    You do realize I’m talking about the planes full of migrants deported without due process, not just one case, right?

                  • JonsJava@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 hours ago

                    Explain how your Mental gymnastics is twisting the literal text into something it’s not, and I’ll apologize. Give me a line by line of the actual text, not an interpretation. I came with facts. You’ve come with feelings.

      • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Alien Enemies Act. Google it.

        Yes, not at war, nor is there an invasion

        Alien Enemies Act. Google it.

        Yes again, not at war, nor is there an invasion

        Because activist judges

        Yes activist judges, like the ones who wanted him deported? Or are they only activist judges when it goes against your views?

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          Alien Enemies Act. Google it.

          Yes activist judges, like the ones who wanted him deported?

          You think it’s only activist judges that order illegal immigrants to be deported? To be clear - he wasn’t ordered to be deported because he was determined to be MS13. He was ordered to be deported because he was an illegal immigrant.

          • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Alien Enemies Act. Google it.

            Yes the wartime Act? Is the us at war?

            You think it’s only activist judges that order illegal immigrants to be deported?

            No i never said that hahahaha

            To be clear - he wasn’t ordered to be deported because he was determined to be MS13. He was ordered to be deported because he was an illegal immigrant.

            Oh so, the stay of deportation was perfectly fine, not by an “activist” judge.

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 hours ago

              Yes the wartime Act? Is the us at war?

              “The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 allows the U.S. President to detain or deport individuals from enemy nations during wartime or in response to threats against the U.S.

              Congress is the only one that can declare war, correct, but the President doesn’t need a war to be declared by congress in order to invoke the Alien Enemies Act. A quick google, which I have repeatedly encouraged you to do if you doubt what I’m saying, would have shown you this information right away. It’s not hidden.

              Oh so, the stay of deportation was perfectly fine, not by an “activist” judge.

              Irellevant. Activist judge or not, the stay of deportation is overruled by the Alien Enemies Act.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  The government isn’t invading.

                  The President of the USA decides if there is an invasion or predatory incursion, that’s the point. Not congress, not you - the president.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 hours ago

                  The president does have the power during wartime… which the president doesnt get to decide, congress does.

                  I don’t know how many times it needs to be pointed out to you, because even your own links specifically say it, but you’re wrong. It can be invoked during wartime OR when there is an invasion or predatory incursion which is at the discretion of the President. “Or” is the key word here that you don’t seem to be understanding.

                  Congress decides when it is “wartime”.

                  The President decides when there is an ongoing invasion or predatory incursion.

                  • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    There isn’t an invasion or predatory incursions though, that’s just factual. Otherwise the president of El Salvador couldn’t have come to the us, as they are the “enemy” “invading”. That’s what you don’t seem to be understanding

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  I did, there is no ongoing invasion OR predatory incursion. There’s the issue

                  According to you, but you don’t get to decide that. According to the President however, who DOES get to decide if there is, there is. Your own links say this.

                  If you don’t like that the President has the power to do this under the Alien Enemy Act, you should say that instead of saying that the President doesn’t have the power to do it when he clearly does.

                  • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    No, not according to me according to the real world and what’s happening

                    The president does have the power during wartime… which the president doesnt get to decide, congress does.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  Ok i dont know what the deal is with this “max comment depth” error since you can clearly still go further.

                  Yes? And did you keep reading? How those words are specifically used during wartime or invasion which this is clearly not?

                  The president is the one that gets to decide if an invasion is happening, per the act.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 hours ago

                  again “max comment depth”:

                  Are you pretending that the last 2 sentences of the text on that image, which I have already pointed out, do not exist? Here, I’ll point it out again:

                  But the president need not wait for congress to invoke the law based on a threatened or ongoing invasion or predatory incursion

                  This is what the President did, and the act allows for it.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 hours ago

                  apparently we’ve reached “max comment depth” down below so I’ll reply here:

                  Yes? And did you keep reading? How those words are specifically used during wartime or invasion which this is clearly not?

                  You mean did I keep reading the very next sentence? I sure did!

                  The president has inherent authority to repel these kinds of sudden attacks — an authority that necessarily implies the discretion to decide when an invasion or predatory incursion is underway.

                • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 hours ago

                  FROM YOUR OWN LINK:

                  But the president need not wait for Congress to invoke the law based on a threatened or ongoing invasion or predatory incursion.

                  • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 hours ago

                    Yes? And did you keep reading? How those words are specifically used during wartime or invasion which this is clearly not?