Thank you Lisa for focussing on this! It's very curious that Trump-Miller announces or gives hints (in the form of threats always) about what their next outrage is. They are looking for another response other than what they are getting? Across the board on the issues they are testing what they can get away with, first *assuming* that they actually have dictatorial powers. They assume they are have authoritarian powers now with the abdication of the GOP in Congress, and the SCOTUS majority. In a way this challenge is at least good for us to learn about what really makes our country great, how we evolved. And now we can perversely through threats to our democracy. It's down to the people, awakening the sleepy masses. Truth be told, if they are into white supremacy (they are) this law that we live by was created by *white people* through the centuries.
So by announcing their threats, they give us time to get up to speed, to learn, or relearn, remember, what this country is about.The Writ of Habeas Corpus is a good lesson!
It is constantly infuriating to have Stephen Miller, who did not attend law school, who has not passed any bar exam, who cannot practice law, start to opine on legal issues, especially Constitutional issues. Why don't the press ask him specific questions to define what he's talking about? Why don't real lawyers in this administration shut him down? Don't worry, I know these are rhetorical questions. I understand that these comments need to be covered, but it's the same type of nonsense coming from RFK, Jr (swimming in an ebola stream with his kids and grandkids) regarding medicine. When the nightmare is over, we really have to reinstate the issue of expertise and shun the conspiracy theories and those who have no facts or real knowledge.
Agreed, the Steve Vladeck article is also a must read for understanding this issue clearly. And thank you, Lisa Needham for this revelatory article, which I've forwarded to 2 atty friends.
Alternate suggestion: Instead of suspending a core constitutional right how about... hiring more judges and lawyers to deal with the immigration backlog and legally process people through proper channels. Deport people whose cases don't reasonably grant them entry to their home countries in those instances when doing so won't be life threatening, show some compassion for the rest - Afghan refugees, for just one example. And leave students the fuck alone for exerting their legal right to speak freely. Problem solved.
The Democrats in Congress tried to pass a bill that would do exactly that - hire more immigration judges, establish more immigration courts, and spend more money on immigration issues. Trump ordered his lackeys in Congress to kill that bill.
The Democrats can be rightfully criticized for not introducing the bill months or years ago, and thereby leaving the president to suffer the criticisms over immigration that rightly should be criticizing Congress, which has complete control to write immigration laws, whereas the president can only enforce them with the money allotted for that purpose by Congress.
Republicans are masters of creating a problem, usually by underfunding, and then screaming about how terrible the problem is and so it must be completely eliminated. Underfunding public education is one classic example. Immigration is another.
I always presumed it was only Congress that could suspend habeas corpus protections and that only in wartime. I know Lincoln tried to do it but I'm not sure he was actually allowed to do so. The radical Republicans always kept him on a tight leash. Of course our supine Senate seems more than willing to allow their god-king to do anything he likes. I very much doubt that they will be successful in any attempt at suspension. The courts simply will not allow it. I'd stake my life on it, because if the courts failed us, as has Congress, this country wouldn't be living in, and I'm too old to emigrate.
It is quite clear that Miller (and trump in his bitches about trials) is blowing smoke. The Extremes, of course, won't get to this until someone in the executive branch actually TRIES to suspend habeas.
One small quibble. The "expedited removal" is limited in its use. It applies just to those removed as they try to go through a port of entry, to certain stowaways (by sea) or to border crossers elsewhere who are caught near the border. Even then there are exceptions, the main one being asylum claims.
For all others here already, trump is correct that further hearings are required in the formal process. The problem is the backlog of the immigration courts; the bipartisan act that trump squelched the necessary increase in them. So he's really saying "it's impossible because I don't want to spend the money to do it the right way." And of course, the fact is that there are millions of law abiding and hard working undocumented immigrants who don't need to be ejected at all if we had a sane immigration policy in the first place. They may be mowing your lawn or cleaning your toilet as you read this. Getting actual criminals out would take much less time, because there really aren't that MANY of them.
There is a difference in the level of due process, however, between deporting a criminal under the immigration laws and sending them to a PRISON in another country. For the latter, there has to be an actual CONVICTION of a crime, not just an immigration court finding, even assuming we can outsource our prisons. It might be possible that Kilmar would be subject to deportation if he were returned. But he should NOT under our laws be subject to being put in prison at our behest. The same is true of most if not all of those currently in CECOT.
The reason the whole CECOT mess has exploded? Miller, without doubt, is the bright idea behind using the AEA not realizing that even IT requires due process. After that debacle one can only hope the courts would pay scant attention to anything he cooks up.
Stephen Miller is Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda chief, reincarnated or cloned.
Not just for Miller copying Goebbels evil ideals and actions, the two look identical. Their dead-inside gaze is the same, as is their white supremacy.
Thank you Lisa for focussing on this! It's very curious that Trump-Miller announces or gives hints (in the form of threats always) about what their next outrage is. They are looking for another response other than what they are getting? Across the board on the issues they are testing what they can get away with, first *assuming* that they actually have dictatorial powers. They assume they are have authoritarian powers now with the abdication of the GOP in Congress, and the SCOTUS majority. In a way this challenge is at least good for us to learn about what really makes our country great, how we evolved. And now we can perversely through threats to our democracy. It's down to the people, awakening the sleepy masses. Truth be told, if they are into white supremacy (they are) this law that we live by was created by *white people* through the centuries.
So by announcing their threats, they give us time to get up to speed, to learn, or relearn, remember, what this country is about.The Writ of Habeas Corpus is a good lesson!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus
It is constantly infuriating to have Stephen Miller, who did not attend law school, who has not passed any bar exam, who cannot practice law, start to opine on legal issues, especially Constitutional issues. Why don't the press ask him specific questions to define what he's talking about? Why don't real lawyers in this administration shut him down? Don't worry, I know these are rhetorical questions. I understand that these comments need to be covered, but it's the same type of nonsense coming from RFK, Jr (swimming in an ebola stream with his kids and grandkids) regarding medicine. When the nightmare is over, we really have to reinstate the issue of expertise and shun the conspiracy theories and those who have no facts or real knowledge.
Steve Vladeck
One First
148. Suspending Habeus Corpus
https://open.substack.com/pub/stevevladeck/p/148-suspending-habeas-corpus?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=87r6i
Agreed, the Steve Vladeck article is also a must read for understanding this issue clearly. And thank you, Lisa Needham for this revelatory article, which I've forwarded to 2 atty friends.
Alternate suggestion: Instead of suspending a core constitutional right how about... hiring more judges and lawyers to deal with the immigration backlog and legally process people through proper channels. Deport people whose cases don't reasonably grant them entry to their home countries in those instances when doing so won't be life threatening, show some compassion for the rest - Afghan refugees, for just one example. And leave students the fuck alone for exerting their legal right to speak freely. Problem solved.
The Democrats in Congress tried to pass a bill that would do exactly that - hire more immigration judges, establish more immigration courts, and spend more money on immigration issues. Trump ordered his lackeys in Congress to kill that bill.
The Democrats can be rightfully criticized for not introducing the bill months or years ago, and thereby leaving the president to suffer the criticisms over immigration that rightly should be criticizing Congress, which has complete control to write immigration laws, whereas the president can only enforce them with the money allotted for that purpose by Congress.
Republicans are masters of creating a problem, usually by underfunding, and then screaming about how terrible the problem is and so it must be completely eliminated. Underfunding public education is one classic example. Immigration is another.
I always presumed it was only Congress that could suspend habeas corpus protections and that only in wartime. I know Lincoln tried to do it but I'm not sure he was actually allowed to do so. The radical Republicans always kept him on a tight leash. Of course our supine Senate seems more than willing to allow their god-king to do anything he likes. I very much doubt that they will be successful in any attempt at suspension. The courts simply will not allow it. I'd stake my life on it, because if the courts failed us, as has Congress, this country wouldn't be living in, and I'm too old to emigrate.
It is!
Andrew, What part of my long comment are you responding to? What is? 🤔
Herr Goebbles reincarnated.
It is quite clear that Miller (and trump in his bitches about trials) is blowing smoke. The Extremes, of course, won't get to this until someone in the executive branch actually TRIES to suspend habeas.
One small quibble. The "expedited removal" is limited in its use. It applies just to those removed as they try to go through a port of entry, to certain stowaways (by sea) or to border crossers elsewhere who are caught near the border. Even then there are exceptions, the main one being asylum claims.
For all others here already, trump is correct that further hearings are required in the formal process. The problem is the backlog of the immigration courts; the bipartisan act that trump squelched the necessary increase in them. So he's really saying "it's impossible because I don't want to spend the money to do it the right way." And of course, the fact is that there are millions of law abiding and hard working undocumented immigrants who don't need to be ejected at all if we had a sane immigration policy in the first place. They may be mowing your lawn or cleaning your toilet as you read this. Getting actual criminals out would take much less time, because there really aren't that MANY of them.
There is a difference in the level of due process, however, between deporting a criminal under the immigration laws and sending them to a PRISON in another country. For the latter, there has to be an actual CONVICTION of a crime, not just an immigration court finding, even assuming we can outsource our prisons. It might be possible that Kilmar would be subject to deportation if he were returned. But he should NOT under our laws be subject to being put in prison at our behest. The same is true of most if not all of those currently in CECOT.
The reason the whole CECOT mess has exploded? Miller, without doubt, is the bright idea behind using the AEA not realizing that even IT requires due process. After that debacle one can only hope the courts would pay scant attention to anything he cooks up.