Deporting the Cancer Kid
Plus: Pell Grant fraud, New York mayoral candidate defaulting on student loans, and more...

What do you do with U.S. citizen children when a noncitizen parent is deported? The Trump administration has so far answered this question by saying, Well, actually, it's not much of a question at all, hurry up and deport them already, let's not ask any questions or consult any lawyers.
Terry Doughty, a U.S. district judge in Louisiana, says that a 2-year-old U.S. citizen was deported with her pregnant mother to Honduras. "Lawyers representing the father of the 2-year-old U.S. citizen who was deported, identified as V.M.L. in court documents, filed an emergency petition in the Western District of Louisiana on Thursday seeking her release," reports The Washington Post. "The child was put on a plane to Honduras the next morning before the court opened."
Get your morning news roundup from Liz Wolfe and Reason.
Doughty, who President Donald Trump appointed, issued an order expressing his fear that the toddler had been deported against her father's wishes, noting that it is "illegal and unconstitutional" to deport U.S. citizens. "The Government contends that this is all okay because the mother wishes that the child be deported with her. But the Court doesn't know that," wrote the judge. "Seeking the path of least resistance, the Court called counsel for the Government at 12:19 p.m. CST, so that we could speak with VML's mother and survey her consent and custodial rights. The Court was independently aware at the time that the plane, tail number N570TA, was above the Gulf of America. The Court was then called back by counsel for the Government at 1:06 p.m. CST, informing the Court that a call with VML's mother would not be possible, because she (and presumably VML) had just been released in Honduras." A hearing is set for May 16 due to the judge's "strong suspicion that the Government just deported a U.S. citizen with no meaningful process."
Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin subsequently declared that the "parent made the decision to take the child with them to Honduras," adding that "it is common that parents want to be removed with their children." Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) allegedly prevented the woman from speaking with her lawyers or making arrangements with family members for the care of the child, notifying the father that both mother and child had been taken into ICE custody but denying him information about the whereabouts of his child. The mother "was granted less than one minute on the phone before the call was abruptly terminated when her spouse tried to provide legal counsel's phone number," according to attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union.
"Doughty's sharp criticism of the Trump administration is particularly notable because he issued a series of major decisions in favor of Trump and his allies in recent years, most notably backing conservatives in legal challenges to the Biden administration's efforts to rein in what it claimed was misinformation on social media platforms about vaccines and certain politically charged topics," reports Politico. This reminds me a bit of when the Fourth Circuit rebuked the government's actions in carrying out Kilmar Abrego Garcia's deportation, with J. Harvie Wilkinson—who, as Glenn Greenwald told me last week, "has long been considered kind of the model of a great right-wing conservative judge"—writing the opinion.
Another similar case: Two other U.S. citizen children were deported to Honduras with their illegal immigrant mother, denying the 4-year-old child—who has metastatic cancer—access to his medication.
Gracie Willis, an attorney with the National Immigration Project, told NBC that the boy with cancer and his 7-year-old sister were detained on Thursday; taken to El Paso, Texas; and flown to Honduras on Friday morning.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, when asked about this over the weekend, called the media coverage "misleading," telling Meet the Press "you guys make it sound like ICE agents kicked down the door and grabbed the 2-year-old and threw him on an airplane."
"Their mothers, who were illegally in this country, were deported. The children went with their mothers," Rubio continued. "If those children are U.S. citizens, they can come back into the United States if there's their father or someone here who wants to assume them. But ultimately, who was deported was their mother, their mothers who were here illegally. The children just went with their mothers."
The issue, which Rubio did not grapple with, is that the deported mothers not have sufficient access to attorneys or family members to make arrangements for the care of minor children. This runs contra ICE's own policies, "which mandate coordination for the care of minor children with willing caretakers—regardless of immigration status—when deportations are being carried out," per the ACLU.
And all of this contradicts the administration's official line: "If you look at the manifest of these flights of people that are being deported, these are some of the most vile human beings imaginable that we're getting out of our country—sex offenders, rapists, killers," said Rubio. "That's who we're prioritizing being sent out." This is not true. They're sending out the pregnant mother of a 2-year-old and the mother of a child with advanced cancer. It is true that these women are in this country illegally, and thus may well be deportable. But the government hasn't shown us any evidence that these moms are "the most vile human beings imaginable" or Tren de Aragua members or linked to MS-13 or people with criminal records at all.
Rubio and Trump and the rest expect us to be gullible. It would be more honest for them to just say: We will deport as many people as we can, and do it quickly as a show of force, to signal that we're serious.
Trump has ruminated on these issues in the past: "I don't want to be breaking up families," he told Meet the Press back in December, "so the only way you don't break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back."
Scenes from New York: "Mayoral candidate Jessica Ramos wants to manage the city's $112 billion budget, but she's failed to get her own fiscal house in order—defaulting on nearly $80,000 in student loans," reports The New York Post. "Two filings in Queens state supreme court from 2019 show that Ramos, a state senator from the borough, defaulted on a pair of loans: one for $35,757.21 and the other for $42,550.25."
QUICK HITS
- "Intellectual and journalistic communities where friends aren't allowed to criticize friends quickly rot from the inside," writes Jesse Singal on his Substack, referring to Bari Weiss' interview with Rubio in which she declined to press the secretary of state on deportations. "If anyone else had published this interview, I would have criticized it, and I don't like the idea of declining to do so just because I like Bari," he adds. "She just let Rubio distance himself from these deportations without any pushback. That isn't a properly journalistic way to interview an exceptionally powerful man making exceptionally consequential decisions about the lives of faraway people who have no say in the matter."
- Speaking of Rubio: He has indicated that President Trump will decide this week on whether to keep pursuing a Ukraine-Russia settlement agreement and what that might look like.
- "Arrivals of ships carrying automobiles in April was down 36%," reports The Seattle Times, drawing on data from the Marine Exchange of Puget Sound. And "the number of container vessels arriving or departing from Seattle and Tacoma between April 1 and April 15 was down around 27% compared with the first half of March and by around 24% from April 1–15, 2024." Given shipping lag times, the full effect won't be felt until May.
- The West Alabama Women's Center was once the only abortion provider in that region of the state. Now it provides free car seats, clothes, formula, and diapers to women in need, and it plans to convert an old abortion recovery room into a birthing center, where poor women can deliver their babies in the presence of midwives and doulas who will attend to them. They do pop-up events in rural areas offering ultrasounds and blood pressure checks, and they provide a host of other pregnancy-care services to low-income women in the state. My pro-life views are showing, but what an incredible improvement.
- A reason to scrap Pell Grants?
25% of community college applicants in California are now AI bots.
Scammers enroll the bots in online courses long enough to get money from the Pell Grant system.
Welcome to the future. https://t.co/atDcnQmN4z pic.twitter.com/V6IjxTsxLB
— Alec Stapp (@AlecStapp) April 26, 2025
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Deporting the Cancer Kid
Have we found a holy grail on this issue?
No. Democrats' treatment of DJ Daniel should be obvious precedent.
Anchor babies flaw. If mom gets deported anyway she sometimes wants to take the kid with her.
They still deny anchor babies are a thing.
What about balloon boys?
If you mean what shrike uses to get a date, then yes.
Not after screaming about separating families during trumps first term.
The mothers chose to take their kids with them. It is amazing seeing the same libertarians who argue mothers can cut their kids dicks off can't take the kids with them when deported.
In the case where there is another parent not being deported, the situation is a bit different. If both parents are being deported, or there's only one in the picture, it totally makes sense that the kid goes with them.
Depends on custody agreements.
We saw during the Elian Gonzalez case how this works with foreign nationals.
Of course. I'm just saying, it's not always as simple as keeping the kid with the mother (which I'm sure makes sense in most cases).
A lot of dems demonstrated that politics was greater than family.
"In the case where there is another parent not being deported, the situation is a bit different. If both parents are being deported, or there's only one in the picture, it totally makes sense that the kid goes with them."
Sounds like an issue for the parents to resolve, not the government. Mothers, fair or not, usually get custody of the child. The father is free to fight this, but unless he can prove the mother is a danger to the child, he is not going to get far.
Yes, but for the parents to resolve it, they need the opportunity to communicate with each other and the immigration officials. It's not obvious that this is a custody dispute, either.
I feel certain this issue never came up at the dinner table.
One family had two years to resolve it, the other four. How much more time do they need?
Fair or not, criminal convictions break up families with little notice.
The hearing was not sprung upon her. She knew it was coming. She had PLENTY of time to plan something out. Her IGNORING the summons does not mean she was not advised.
If she did not plan in the time before she was deported, that is on her alone. Not on us. We owe her ZERO more time than she was given.
Again, if she was facing charges for theft, you would not see the caterwauling "WHAT ABOUT HER KIDS?!?!?"
Be a fucking adult and handle your fucking business.
Better yet, do not come here illegally and THEN start a family.
They have the internet and phones in Hondurus.
Yeah, right. Quit making up stories about brown people.
Apologies.
It's not clear from the article if the father is a citizen or legal resident or if he even lives with the child but the question remains why did the mother ignore a deportation order? The government seems to be saying that the child would be free to come back, in other words the child was not in fact deported, she simply accompanied her mother who was released in her native country. She was not sent to a hellhole prison in El Salvador. As far as any denial of due process we're left to take the word of the ACLU. Sorry but they have zero credibility with me. Really just another overblown nothingburger.
The father is also an illegal immigrant, and he chose to stay in the U.S. and get separated from his family and sick child.
The best possible reading of that is he has a job in the United States that he's working under the table, and will be sending remittance to his family back at home. Which in some fairness is probably his best move since a U.S. salary, even an under the table one, will probably easily pay for his daughters care in Honduras whereas it's near certain it would not pay for her care here in the United States.
Here is the problem, Zeb. As I explained previously, there are going to be MILLIONS of these cases:
https://reason.com/2025/04/17/federal-appeals-court-rejects-trump-administrations-attempt-to-block-return-of-kilmar-abrego-garcia/?comments=true#comment-11009262
This is all an intentionally created crisis.
The Biden Admin and NGOs who created this crisis purposely overloaded the asylum process with these false petitions. The purpose is to so overload the courts that it takes years before an asylum seeker gets their hearing, where the vast majority of seekers will be denied asylum and deported. By overloading the system with immigrants who don't realize their temporary work permit is contingent on a hearing where they will be deported, these NGOs are intentionally creating exactly these stories: Millions of moms who came to our country, were deceived into thinking they were free to put roots down, specifically so that they can be used as props in stories like this.
It has always been the case that when an Asylum seeker's petition is denied, that they will be deported immediately. If you say, "oop, you will be deported in a couple weeks, go tie up loose ends", they disappear. And it has always been the case that if they care for children- even US Citizens- the kids go with them. It was this way during the Obama administration and it is that way now.
The main difference is that we are now reaping the vast harvest sowed by the Biden administration- where they turned tens of millions of immigrants into props. It is ridiculous.
Yeah, I get that. The big problem here is that this situation was created in the first place. It's going to be messy trying to do something about it.
Apparently deportation has been a cure for cancer for all these years and nobody noticed until just now when it seems like it stopped working for some reason.
Otherwise, pondering the deportation of two people with(in one degree of someone who has) cancer seems exceedingly cherrypicked.
Cherry-picking, in the form of finding the exceptionally pitiful example, is the core of liberal morality.
And then promoting a general false equivalence.
Elián González comes to mind. Despite all the wailing and gnashing of teeth he went on to become an engineer in Cuba and seems to be just fine. These Latin American countries are neither shit-holes or paradise, they are the vast gamut between those poles. How they are described depends entirely upon the slant the writer wishes to apply.
The Cancer Kid can get treatment in their home country - hell even Americans travel to Latin American countries for cancer treatment.
Two other U.S. citizen children were deported to Honduras with their illegal immigrant mother, denying the 4-year-old child—who has metastatic cancer—access to his medication.
Forcing an American to live in Honduras is bad enough.
We seem to be back to calling south American countries shit holes without doctors. Thought that was racist at one point.
https://www.placidway.com/search-medical-centers/Cancer-Treatment/Honduras/1
This doesn't exist.
They’re shithole countries when convenient for the Democrats to say what illegal aliens shouldn’t be deported back to, but they’re not shithole counties when the bad orange man says they are.
Well done, Grasshopper. When you can hold two or three completely contradictory ideas as equally true at the same time, it will be time for you to leave.
Bet you not one democrat crying will donate money for the kids cancer treatment.
The children were not deported. They accompanied a parent deported to their native country. They can legally return if the parents agree or come back when they are of legal age without their parents consent. This shit has been going on forever.
Yes, this is true as far as the child not being deported. There is some question if the mother actually wanted that since trusting the governments word is usually unwise, but in this particular case it seems rather improbable that the mother would prefer her sick kid go into foster care in the U.S. never to be seen again.
Also, since the father is also an illegal immigrant having the kid stay with him in the U.S. is not a real option either. It would, at best, delay this exact same situation until he gets deported.
Not that any of it matters, of course, since they will probably just reenter the United States and meet up with him again in a few months at most.
I know it seems like semantics to keep pointing that out (that the citizen children rent being deported), but it’s the truth of the matter and the people appealing to my emotion should be more honest in their language.
“….should be more honest….”
No, no. It’s bad orange man who should be more honest. After all, he did say there would be……“mass deportations”.
Not sure why Liz seems to think trump indicated that only the “bad hombres” will be sent home. Was she not paying attention?
Lawyers representing the father of the 2-year-old U.S. citizen who was deported...
The boys didn't vote for Trump just so the government could continue siding mothers over fathers.
Have you thought about blaming the parent who knowingly broke the law?
Parental responsibility does not reside at Reason.
It takes a village to raise a child.
And to do that, the village takes your child.
All responsibility is racist, and surprisingly troublesome for the libertarians at Reason.
The sins of the parents are not the sins of the child.
But you want families to stay together, right?
Kids in cages!
The mom took the child. The government didn't expel the kid, Tony.
So, no parent should go to jail ever?
""The sins of the parents are not the sins of the child.""
I guess you have never had an anti-racism training.
...so you're FOR family separations now.
What changed?
...Also they can't pumice your corns if they've been deported, right?
It's fucking doomsday.
Sure, blame whoever you want. But finding the right person to blame doesn't change the actual situation.
The situation is the mother choosing to take their child. You can argue courts should be involved in custody, but it gets weird when the parents have separate citizenship.
Did the mother have time and opportunity to make arrangements had she decided otherwise? Because that is the WHOLE point here. If families want to take their children, obviously that's not an issue.
Will the child's cancer treatment be delayed? Is the child able to continue the same treatment? You don't just start/stop/take a break or switch cancer treatments on a whim. They're not tariffs.
"Did the mother have time and opportunity to make arrangements had she decided otherwise?"
She had YEARS.
How much more fucking time do you want to give her?
It's qb. However much time it takes to keep the illegal in country.
That is the problem, but the description is incomplete.
* The children's ages tell you these parents had two and four years to prepare for deportation.
* The sources (WaPo, Politico, Meet the Press) are about as TDS-partisan as they come, and the facts stated here are almost certainly incomplete. The one minute phone call and the lack of medication just scream for more detail.
* All criminal convictions break up families. How much time do convicted criminals get to make arrangements? These families has two and four years notice, judging by the children's ages.
As reported, these tug at heart strings, but the reporting is designed to do that, not shed light. Considering the cited sources and the brevity of the excerpts, I suspect there is a lot more to the story which Reason will never report.
Garcia is an example. The MS-13 accusation was by an informant, oh so very reliable. The wife beating TRO was dropped without reporting any details. And Reason left out details of when he was pulled over by highway patrol driving a van full of probable illegal immigrants from Texas to Virginia(?) with no luggage and in a car belonging to an illegal immigrant who had been deported for driving illegal immigrants around the country.
I don't expect any counter details from Reason reporting in these cases either.
The children's ages tell you these parents had two and four years to prepare for deportation
Let's be realistic here. She had 3 months to prepare for deportation, because Biden wasn't doing it. It's very likely the child had cancer and was in treatment at that point.
* The sources (WaPo, Politico, Meet the Press) are about as TDS-partisan as they come, and the facts stated here are almost certainly incomplete. The one minute phone call and the lack of medication just scream for more detail.
Yes, this is fair, but the government doesn't seem to be denying this account.
All criminal convictions break up families. How much time do convicted criminals get to make arrangements? These families has two and four years notice, judging by the children's ages.
Criminals are not cut off from communication or rushed out of the country. They essentially have infinite time to make arrangements.
As reported, these tug at heart strings
Damn straight. My whole point is not to say I'm appalled (but I am appalled). It's to say "I told you so." Because I said here, before Trump was inaugurated, that mass deportations will be ugly and Trump will lose support and destroy any chance he has to make positive changes.
Do you really think you'd hear the full government side from those sources? The reported denial is as untrustworthy as everything else from them.
The mothers have better communication with their families than prisoners do. Honduras has internet and telephones too; prisons do not.
Criminals do not have infinite time to make arrangements. They seldom get even the three months you recognize these mothers had.
The problem is not the current enforcement of laws which have existed for years. It is the change from lax enforcement to actual enforcement.
The mothers have better communication with their families than prisoners do. Honduras has internet and telephones too; prisons do not.
Too late to be of any use in terms of cancer treatment once they're out of the country.
The United States does not, in fact, have a monopoly on cancer treatment. Honduras has treatment facilities.
She gambled with her kids treatment being completed before they were caught by immigration, and she lost that gamble. She could have left her kid in the U.S. with foster care and they would have been treated on the U.S. taxpayer dime, and she choose not to do that. They can get treatment in Honduras if they are so inclined, but foreign nationals do not have a right to healthcare in the United States.
In fact, there is a specific type of VISA for this very thing and, as far as we know, they never applied for one opting instead to do it illegally which blew up in their faces.
Accountability for their kid stops with them. All of this was predictable.
Couple of quibbles there, but the last line is spot on: the parents chose to gamble with their kids, and the consequences are on them.
* No need for foster care; the father is a citizen and still here.
* The kid is a citizen and not a foreign national seeking illegal treatment.
Maybe this is a different story than the one I was presented with yesterday, but in the story I saw the father was not in fact a citizen and was told if he came to get the kid he'd be arrested by ICE as well given his immigration status.
If the father is a citizen, then it begs the question of where the fuck the father actually is because he's not winning the father of the year if true.
Thanks. That's the problem with Liz choosing such dinky excerpts from such biased media. A lot of counter info is going to come out over the next few days, and no one at Reason is going to report it, not even Liz.
So because Biden was failing to enforce the law against her she should be given more time now that the law is being enforced? And are you not counting the three months from the election to inauguration when the candidate promising immigration enforcement was simply waiting to take office?
And why didn't she take the opportunity of Biden's non-enforcement to find a way to legalize her status or prepare for deportation?
Oh and every Central American country has phone a d internet service.
“She had 3 months to prepare for deportation, because Biden wasn't doing it.”
She knew she was in the country illegally and COULD be deported at any time, but because Biden didn’t do his fucking job, that’s supposed to just make us go “oh well”? (Ignoring the fact that the campaign trail is nearly a year long process and Trump was elected in November, so it’s more like nearly 18 months.)
“Damn straight. My whole point is not to say I'm appalled (but I am appalled). It's to say "I told you so." Because I said here, before Trump was inaugurated, that mass deportations will be ugly and Trump will lose support and destroy any chance he has to make positive changes.”
The only people making this ugly are the DNC and journalists trying to emotionally manipulate the populace by saying things like “citizen children are being deported”. That is not, in fact, what is happening (at least in the cases currently highlighted).
The only people making this ugly are the DNC and journalists trying to emotionally manipulate the populace by saying things like “citizen children are being deported”.
If the quote below is confirmed however, I'll give you a hard disagree. This is entirely ICE and Trump's fault.
ICE held the families incommunicado, refusing or failing to respond to multiple attempts by attorneys and family members to contact them. In one instance, a mother was granted less than one minute on the phone before the call was abruptly terminated when her spouse tried to provide legal counsel’s phone number...
the families were completely isolated during critical moments when decisions were being made about the welfare of their minor children. This included decisions with serious implications for the health, safety, and legal rights of the children involved–without any opportunity to coordinate with caretakers or consult with legal representatives...
These actions stand in direct violation of ICE’s own written and informal directives, which mandate coordination for the care of minor children with willing caretakers–regardless of immigration status–when deportations are being carried out.
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/ice-deports-3-u-s-citizen-children-held-incommunicado-prior-to-the-deportation
I trust the ACLU on this about as much as I trust MSNBC, but will agree that that would be bad.
Though I will reiterate that it’s (deportation) been a known possibility for at least 18 months and a guaranteed certainty since November, so I feel like trying to tug my heartstrings that there “wasn’t time” isn’t necessarily persuasive. Doubly so if it’s true that they just straight up refused to go their trial dates.
Actually, I would trust the ACLU and MSNBC to greatly distort if not lie about what happened.
"Did the mother have time and opportunity to make arrangements had she decided otherwise?"
How long was she (illegally) here, dimwit?
Two years and four years, at least.
The actual situation is she came here illegally. She decided to start a family. She ignored hearings.
This is 100% her fault.
Do you expect parents who write for this joke of a publication to give a shit about the concept of parental responsibility?
I have a seven month old kid, and shockingly I did not illegally immigrate to Germany while expecting Germans to pay for my now German citizen child to get treatment.
I wager that people would rightly call me very irresponsible if we had done that, but then I'm white and a man so I'm the only kind of human being that the left believes has agency.
It's well known minorities need white saviors.
Both did. One directly, the other complicitly. The children's ages tell you how long they'd been doing it.
Don't forget to add nine months to those ages.
It's birthright citizenship, not fuckright.
I only mean if we are using the children's ages to determine how long she was here you need to add 9 months to the total. So if the elder child is 4 years 1 month she was here at least 4 years 10 months.
denying the 4-year-old child—who has metastatic cancer—access to his medication.
The kid could have stayed. The illegal made the choice to bring them with her. No fibbing, Liz.
All they have with these stories is appeals to emotion. Qb and sarc were all over it Saturday.
Yeah, kid's with cancer...kind of an emotional issue for me.
Then blame the mother. If she had been convicted of burglary and sent to prison, would you blame the judiciary? Regardless of how immoral our immigration laws are, they aren't Holocaust-level immoral, and the real fault lies with Obama and Biden not enforcing the laws, the courts for letting that pass because "prosecutorial discretion", and the voters electing a President who campaigned on enforcing the laws.
People like to rag on Trump for his executive orders, and that is a terrible way to run a democracy. But it was Obama's and Biden's executive orders which refused to enforce the immigration laws under which these mothers entered the country illegally.
Then blame the mother.
We can't control the mother. We can only (theoretically) control our government's reaction to the mother's behavior.
If she had been convicted of burglary and sent to prison, would you blame the judiciary?
That would not affect the cancer treatment because communication is not cut off.
This would be a whole different issue if ICE said you have a month or whatever to make arrangements. This even goes against their own written rules of conduct for deportations.
Third world countries also have internet and phones. The mothers are less cut off from communication than prisoners are, because prisons limit phone calls and do not have internet. Third world countries also have cancer treatment, and the record of such treatment for prisoners is pretty lousy.
You do not know the government side. Those reporting sources will not tell you.
It looks like we both have our heels dug in and neither of us will convince the other. You're right about us not knowing the full details though so we may as well delay our argument until more details emerge.
True enough. You don't believe parents have any responsibility, that healthcare in the United States is a human right for the entire planet, and that appeals to emotion are a valid basis for public policy.
Just some advice that I know you won't take, when you come across a news story that seems to intentionally hide details while creating a sob story narrative from a publication known for making things up or skewing stories with a certain partisan slant, stop and think for a moment using logic and reason as opposed to emotive knee jerks.
You'll find that you end up with a lot less egg on your face a few weeks after the real details of a story escape the media plantation.
The man in the glass home is chucking rocks.
You understand nothing I write, but assign your imagined meaning, internalize every MAGA fantasy news story posted here, then lecture me about how I should critically understand stuff?
How do you even fit your head through doorways with that massive ego?
I understand what you write, but it's becoming increasingly evident that you write things you don't mean.
The kid could have stayed, and believe it or not there's a lot of cancer clinics in Central America where Europeans and Canadians go when they want to skip the queue.
If you feel bad that the mom chose to take the kid with her, start a GoFundMe for the treatment costs there. I guarantee you they are cheaper than an equivalent American clinic without Medicaid.
Ha. You think anyone tripling down with appeals to emotion to push their narratives actually gives to charity?
Qb and sarc were all over it Saturday.
I know you're lying cuz sarc is hardly here anymore at all - why would he spend time on a saturday here?
That is the point of contention. The administration claims that the mother wanted to take the child, but there was no confirmation about that because the administration made communicating with the mother very hard and deported her before any hearing.
You have any evidence to the contrary, MollyMAiD? Links, citations?
That is what a due process hearing is about, which she never got.
Since you continue to be ignorant on what due process is for illegal immigrants, I’m gonna go ahead and assume you’re wrong about that.
She skipped both immigration appearances she was scheduled for dumdum.
Well that's a lie.
So you're saying your sainted illegal immigrant's a deadbeat parent who doesn't have enough motherly instinct to keep her child with her?
Honduras is a shithole country with no phones right tony?
Has any conflicting evidence been provided?
I know Reason is not going to mention it because journalisming is totes hard and all...
Parents love their kids more than they want to stay here.
Only soulless open borders fanatics could be surprised.
The kid could have stayed. The illegal made the choice to bring them with her. No fibbing, Liz.
Was she given the opportunity to make arrangements had she decided that?
The issue is not that the kid was deported. The issue is the opportunity to continue/arrange care for the child was not given.
How much opportunity are convicted burglars given? Criminal convictions break up families. The alternative is to jail the entire family or not convict criminals with families.
"Was she given the opportunity to make arrangements had she decided that?"
She was here for years, you stupid pile of shit!
I remember liking Liz when she took over from "whores Uber Alles" ENB.
She has become about as bad.
No, she has a long way to go yet.
If those children are U.S. citizens, they can come back into the United States if there's their father or someone here who wants to assume them.
Look, I'm just going to say it: if tolerating illegal alien mothers is the price we pay to keep American kids in America, we need to suck that up. Are the moms even the troublemakers we need to focus on?
If their kids are going to government skools and she is getting benefits and voting then yes, these are the kind of "troublemakers" we need to focus on.
Or we get rid of the welfare state and require ID for voting and she can stay.
I vote option 2.
Definitely two.
The open borders crowd never seem to take into account that it doesn't work if only one of the countries involved is a welfare state.
This is why the Schengen Area works for Europe and Islamic migration doesn't.
Exactly. How many Canadians are charging in through the trees to sign up for Medicare?
They usually come over to pay full price for a procedure so they can get it done before the heat death of the universe.
Most go to Mexico nowadays because American hospital's pricing is starting to get a little stupid.
Starting to? Pricing at American hospitals was out of control twenty years ago when I was still working in healthcare. It got much, much, MUCH worse after the ACA, but fuck us am I right?
I'd be totally fine with option 2. I have no particular animus towards immigrants.
But you'll note the open borders people never talk about how that's a necessary first step to their preferred outcomes, or that the American electorate will never go along with that. The welfare state is one of their biggest sacred cows, and they will fight to the death to maintain them.
To the contrary, most open borders zealots either say we can work on it next or finally admit that it will never be dismantled but we should keep our borders wide open anyways.
The zealots, sure, but there aren't a lot of those.
Most of the people who go along with this stuff are thoughtless emotives, and they are all over this comment section in particular if we were curious about what they 'think' about the situation.
There are 30k incidents of birth tourism a year here. The number of anchor babies is even worse. I can give you stories of women crossing the border days from birth having to be helicoptered to southern az hospitals.
Encouraging people with a benefit doesn't work.
Sorry, but not going to go along with anchor babies.
What crimes should we ignore from parents to avoid problems with their kids?
Fist is making the humane call here. I'm with him.
But even if not, ICE should not be cutting off communication and blocking the parents from making arrangement for the care of the child.
They had multiple years to plan this.
Are they adults or infants?
1. As damikesc says, the two families self-evidently had two and four years to make arrangements.
2. The cites for this ridiculously short notice are some of the most biased TDS sources possible (WaPo, Politico, Meet the Press) and the excerpts are far too short to tell the full tale.
My complaint with unfettered immigration is mostly the lack of assimilation, more than anything else. Someone born here or who grew up here is either American or de facto American, culturally speaking. And parents with American children are more likely to assimilate (I assume). Sure, if the parents are engaged in criminal behavior (beyond that which brought them here), but otherwise.
Anyway, I truly don't like to see little Americans forced to grow up in a shithole (which is anywhere other than the United States).
Re-reading this, I think I'm more of an American Exceptionalist and bigot than those here who are advocating for the deportation!
Magic dirt!
I wouldn't even deport Hitler to Filthadelphia.
I think I'm more of an American Exceptionalist and bigot than those here who are advocating for the deportation!
LOL. I sure don't see bigotry in your logic, but I'll grant you the American exceptionalism part.
You don't see the inherent bigotry of American exceptionalism?
Well, that figures. It's right there in the name; exceptionalism.
Oh great. The pedant is following me again today to criticize my grammar.
If you wrote clearly and said what you actually mean, perhaps you would encounter fewer misunderstandings.
Look up the concept of American exceptionalism. I assume you must be unfamiliar with it given this comment.
Also, and you may consider this pedantic, but what I just criticized had nothing to do with your grammar guy.
Us needs to let Ukraine go. They are all corrupt scum. It's another case of Soviet fighting nazis. Let them.
Two filings in Queens state supreme court from 2019 show that Ramos, a state senator from the borough, defaulted on a pair of loans...
The mayor that NYC needs.
And deserves.
That's worth at least 34 felonies.
"What do you do with U.S. citizen children when a noncitizen parent is deported?"
Exactly what do you mean by "you"?
The family does the same thing it would do if the crook died.
The state, the 'people' does nothing, because they have no responsibility in this case.
It's like saying you can't put a parent in jail. Think of the kids. It is a weak appeal to emotion
What if your only emotion is simpering empathy?
Likely a Kamala voter.
You make comments like this.
sarcasmic 2 days ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Disappearing students off the street, sending people to foreign prisons “by mistake” and doing nothing about it, busting into homes without warrants, telling judges to fuck themselves, and now intentionally depriving children of vital medicine… this is not the America I grew up in. It’s become something I read about when I was a kid. And all of this in four months? What will happen in the next four years?
What will happen in the next four years?
I've been promised a handmaid's tale.
I thought we lived that one already. Can we get an Oryx and Crake?
OMG! What if it turns into 8 years?
Did Tom Fallon deserve to be separated from his family?
https://www.presstelegram.com/2019/07/19/long-beach-man-gets-10-years-in-prison-for-embezzling-injured-workers-funds-using-some-to-open-cigar-shop/
I bet 1/6 defendants had children and the concern about that separation was quite absent from the writers here.
More than that, they separated parents from children and told them they couldn’t even communicate with each other.
The hypocrites complaining about how the children of illegals are being treated didn't say anything about the children of the J6 political prisoners. That makes whatever the Trump administration does to the children of illegals ok. Preach it brother!
How does it differ?
Were the iimmigrant parents shot in the face?
As far as I’m concerned, send the kid back with the parent and let the kid make a choice at age 18, as the law and decisions are currently written. Ideally, children of illegal aliens should not be considered citizens from birth. They should be treated like children of diplomats.
Exactly what do you mean by "you"?
Polish monocles. Are *we* not libertarians?
My pro-life views are showing, but what an incredible improvement.
Yes, but now how are the Democrats going to practice eugenics on poor colored people?
Let's ask the ghost of Margaret Sanger.
Trump has ruminated on these issues in the past: "I don't want to be breaking up families," he told Meet the Press back in December, "so the only way you don't break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back."
Promises made promises keep
tail number N570TA, was above the Gulf of America
Got it right this time.
...President Trump will decide this week on whether to keep pursuing a Ukraine-Russia settlement agreement and what that might look like.
Deadlines. Another negotiation tactic.
The fact that that would be honest is why they'll never say it.
Pretty sure Holman has been saying that since day one and you've been squawking about it the whole time.
He just repeats whatever Maddow is saying.
Holman has made no secret about it. Statements like that are part of the strategy. Making it distasteful to people thinking about crossing the border illegally. Make people think twice before paying thousands of dollars to have someone smuggle them in.
The previous admin and a few democrat govs and mayors gave the impression that it was worth it and you would get free room and board for your effort. That needed to end.
Arrivals of ships carrying automobiles in April was down 36%...
It took Trump to solve the climate crisis.
Glenn Greenwald: Americans' Liberties are in Danger
Imagine what would happen here if Reason noticed and started writing about it.
"Pennsylvania Climate Scientist Must “Pay Up” $530K After 8 Year Legal Battle Over 2 Blog Posts"
[...]
"After a protracted legal battle, that lasted over eight years, a court in Washington D.C. has ordered University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann to pay National Review over half a million dollars in attorney fees and costs.
The ruling marks a significant victory for National Review, which was sued by Mann for defamation and infliction of emotional distress over two blog posts published in 2012 that criticized his work and involvement in a political dispute.
Mann's lawsuit, which the court ultimately deemed meritless, dragged on for years, forcing National Review to expend considerable resources in its defense. During the discovery process, it was revealed that Mann's intention was to use the lawsuit to "ruin National Review."
While National Review ultimately prevailed, the legal battle took a toll. "Between 2012 and 2019...we were forced to spend a considerable amount of time and money defending ourselves against his malicious, meritless suit," the publication stated.
Last week's court order requires Mann to pay National Review $530,820.21 within 30 days, providing some financial restitution for the publication.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/pennsylvania-climate-scientist-must-pay-up-530k-after-8-year-legal-battle-over-2-blog-posts/ar-BB1rk2xA
Maybe he can take Public Imbecile and his fake web site with him
Further:
"Michael Mann Sanctioned for False Testimony, Bad Faith"
[...]
"On cross-examination by Simberg’s lawyer, Victoria Weatherford*, it turned out that the exhibit reflected sworn interrogatory answers that had been served by Mann, but later superseded by revised answers, also given under oath. The $9 million had been reduced to $112,000. To say that Weatherford’s cross-examination was effective is an understatement. And Mann didn’t get away with the misrepresentation, as the jury found only nominal damages of $1.
But still, the false evidence had been presented, and defendants moved for sanctions to be imposed on Mann and his lawyers. Earlier today, more than a year after the events, Judge Alfred Irving entered a long order ruling on the defendants’ sanctions motion. It is embedded below. The facts are rather complicated, but the judge’s conclusions are unequivocal:
Here, the Court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that Dr. Mann, through Mr. Fontaine and Mr. Williams, acted in bad faith when they presented erroneous evidence and made false representations to the jury and the Court regarding damages stemming from loss of grant funding. Specifically, the Court finds that Mr. Fontaine and Mr. Williams knowingly violated the rules of professional conduct in eliciting testimony and offering evidence related to (1) the post-publication unfunded grant amounts depicted in Exhibit 517A, and as reproduced in Exhibit 117, and (2) the post-publication funded grant amounts in Exhibit 116..."
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/03/michael-mann-sanctioned-for-false-testimony-bad-faith.php
Pretty sure Mann qualifies as, well, something.
You mean the Marxist environmentalist lied! I'm shocked schocked I say
Never trust a watermelon.
Couldn’t happen to a worse piece of shit than Michael Mann. That fucker earns everything he gets coming his way like this.
Yeah he's almost Fauci level evil.
Mann deserves this. Still fucking amazing Mann won his initial suit by simply arguing climate crisis. Believe that one is still under appeal.
Like Ehrlich, it's amazing he still gets ink, they're both self-promoting, lying PsOS.
Those are key credentials for the left.
And they make all the earth muffins, hairy women and Beta males, all squishy down there.
The West Alabama Women's Center was once the only abortion provider in that region of the state. Now it provides free car seats, clothes, formula, and diapers to women in need, and it plans to convert an old abortion recovery room into a birthing center...
This grates against my anti-abortion views. Do we really want more Alabamans?
I'm on the fence for abortion. On one hand I love killing babies, but on the other hand, do we really want to be giving women a choice?
Alright, asshole. You just made me laugh out loud in a meeting.
Apparently not an important or interesting meeting.
Unless you work alone, one of the biggest assaults on your happiness is something called a meeting. A meeting is essentially a group of people staring at visual aids until the electrochemical activity in their brains ceases, at which point decisions are made. It's like being in suspended animation, except that people in suspended animation aren't in severe physical discomfort and praying for death.
- Scott Adams
They never are, and I'm the guy who called it.
Do we really want more Alabamans?
Yes. They are our best defense against the Mississippians.
25% of community college applicants in California are now AI bots.
What happens when Skynet defaults on its loans?
we all go back in time to November 5, 1955
It would be more honest for them to just say: We will deport as many people as we can, and do it quickly as a show of force, to signal that we're serious.
That's what a lot of people voted for, and unfortunately journalists have blown their wads on unsavory deportees. Thanks to that, now no amount of heartstrings tugging will sway a majority of Americans on this.
Rubio and Trump and the rest expect us to be gullible.
Gullible Trump-Tards put them on the map.
Gullible means nobody knew who Trump and Rubio were before MAGA. Nobody had heard about them before.
Just how did you manage to get your original account banned here? Enquiring minds want to know!
Let's see. Trump supporters elected a guy who turned out to be pretty much exactly as he claimed. Bama-Biden-Harris fans had to keep pivoting and ignoring changes in their candidate and policy, but cranked up the love no matter what.
Who exactly was gullible?
That would be due process. Can't allow that.
They didn’t use due process to get here.
No. That's not what due-process means, retard. In fact that has nothing to do with due-process.
That reminds me of this exchange:
sarcasmic
February.7.2021 at 2:27 pm
So there’s a difference between law (what society deems to be wrong) and legislation (rules backed with government force)?
No way!
Mother's Lament
February.7.2021 at 2:50 pm
Yeah, that’s not the definition of “law”, sarc, that’s the definition of immorality.
The definition of law is roughly what you gave for legislation (which you also got wrong). To quote:
“Law is a system of rules created and enforced through social or governmental institutions to regulate behavior,[2][3][4][5]… It has been variously described as a science[6][7] and the art of justice.”
https://reason.com/2021/02/07/the-mushroom-moment-manifesto/#comment-8747992
Be fair. To liberals, Sarc included, due process means using emotional reasoning to achieve desired partisan results. Anything else is "unfair".
Way to project, bucko. Due process means they get a lawyer and an opportunity to present their case to a judge. No desired outcome. Just a chance for them to defend themselves in case the government got it wrong. You have a visceral reaction to that concept because your desired partisan outcome is to deport everyone ICE arrests, even their mistakes, to show force and strike fear in the innocent.
She had 2 opportunities and didn't show up to court dumdum.
Hey, fucko, she did get due process and promptly ignored her hearings, twice. Then the judge issued a deportation order, dipshit.
Well, deary, tell us how many chances does a person get before the legal system actually kicks in, and in her case, kicks her out? I have a visceral reaction to endless special pleading based on claims of empathy and "we can't do that cuz it would be mean".
Define "sufficient access" in this context.
Do we put every illegal in front of the SCOTUS so your crowd will shut the fuck up?
I'm betting that nothing will ever be enough for the narrative. The only solution is keep to every single one, give them unlimited resources, and ensure voting rights.
In this case she had zero access. Maybe something more than zero? Or is that too much for you. Yeah, I'm sure that's way too much for you. Any due process is too much. 5A and 14A can go fuck themselves, right?
She crossed the border illegally, dipshit.
She also missed two immigration hearings. She ignored her actual due process. Judge issued final deportation due to her missing the court dates.
Someone made this point.
"She also missed two immigration hearings. She ignored her actual due process. Judge issued final deportation due to her missing the court dates."
If you fail to show for your due process, you are not being denied due process, you refused it.
"But 'victims' deserve endless consideration and limitless second chances!"
- Any Liberal
So the answer to my question is "No!"
That's your answer to any due process at all.
If you fail to show for your due process, you are not being denied due process, you refused it
The deported child was not an illegal immigrant.
According to Trump and his defenders the 14A only grants birthright citizenship if both parents are citizens. So to them the kid isn't a citizen. It's a mongrel spawn of an illegal. ICE can chuck it in the garbage for all they care.
The mom took the kid, retard. ICE didn't deport it.
That assertion is uncorroborated.
You really are retarded aren't you Tony.
The mother says differently, dingbat.
That assertion is uncorroborated.
It's corroborated in the article you're replying under, you stupid fuck.
There was no deportation order for the child. The article and the judge and the ACLU are being dishonest. The child is a citizen apparently under the current interpretation of birthright citizenship. No one disputes that. If the judge is claiming that the government is deporting a citizen he is dead wrong and I'm confident the government will correct him. Should the government prevent this child from going to the Honduras with her mother? Wouldn't that be worse? If there is a custody dispute she can be returned to her father if he is worthy. When she reaches the age of majority she can come to the US or apply for citizenship in Honduras. Nothing horrible about it.
Why do you want to break up families?
The deported child was her child. She took the child with her.
Why do you want us to separate families so?
She was actively prevented from making arrangements to let the kid stay with dad. Only an intellectually dishonest Trump defender (redundant I know) would say that meant she took the kid voluntarily.
Sarc, how do I bluntly say this? You’re full of shit and spreading bullshit with horse shit claims that border on batshit crazy.
This is false. She had many months whole missing her immigration hearings.
The child wasn’t deported.
Fuck you.
How many times do the laws and required dur process have to be linked here before you stop being retarded about it?
That isn't a properly journalistic way to interview an exceptionally powerful man making exceptionally consequential decisions about the lives of faraway people who have no say in the matter.
So if I peruse Singal's substack I'm going to see pushback against Russian Collusion, the FBI targeting PTA Meetings, the FBI targeting Churches, Masking, 6 ft. to flatten the curve, and vaxxing, stolen top secret documents, impeachment for investigation of ties to a hostile foreign power, funding of social and political movements to undermine allied foreign powers, immaculate cognitive decline, etc., etc., etc....
Or is this a case of "Normally, I wouldn't be this critical of my colleagues, but since this is a pet issue that I feel a fringe contributor to my field didn't go hard enough on, I'll chip in the $0.02 that nobody asked for, like a $20 bill stuck to the floor of an adult theater."
Every so often he has to prove to the Marxist media gatekeepers that he really isn't in disagreement he just sometimes has questions.
Playboy twins feared they'd end up dead like Anna Nicole Smith after lives 'crumbled' following 'traumatic' years in Hugh Hefner mansion
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-14654009/Hugh-Hefner-Shannon-twins-crumbled-traumatic-Playboy-mansion.html
Did they eat their way out?
Imagine teenage girls living with a creepy old man in his smelly old sex farm claiming they were fucked up from the experience.
You're putting out Church Lady vibes, you whacky Canuck.
Jerry Falwell is your hero no doubt.
And Jared from Subway is your hero, fuckwit.
What? Did Jared fuck little boys in his basement "playroom"?
No idea. I’m surprised Shrike shits on Denny Hastert so much as Shrike only wishes he could’ve been a coach.
turd, the ass-wipe of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
"You're putting out Church Lady vibes, you whacky Canuck."
Zero surprises Shrike thinks an 70 year old forcing himself on teenagers is cool.
From the article:
"...the rarely-seen sisters - now 35 - revealed they both contracted chlamydia and Karissa emotionally opened up about secretly getting an abortion after Hefner got her pregnant.
'We didn't know much about fashion or style. And we're a lot younger than Bridget [Marquardt], Kendra [Wilkinson] and Holly [Madison] - we're teenagers,' Kristina told the magazine...
In an episode of the docuseries, the twins recalled how they were forced to have a threesome with Hefner on their 19th birthday.
'We had never done a threesome together before, we would never want to,' Kristina expressed, and her twin sister added, 'And that was our 19th birthday. You're never gonna forget that.'
Karissa said at the time, 'Every time I've done it with him, it's assault. For me, it's like rape. He used control mechanisms completely through everything, so I'm happy that I had the abortion.'
Elsewhere in the episode, Karissa expressed that Hefner 'has so much power. It's like a cult. The isolation that I had from the outside world.'"
If you think that's gross, the pederast wants you to know that you're a "church lady".
Buttplug is stuck in the 80's. His jokes, his worldview, the whole nine yards.
I'm sure he headbangs to Mötley Crüe, the hair from the back of his skullet smacking against his bald pate, thinking he's the coolest cat around. And before he discovered children, his knowledge of female sexuality was gleaned from the stack of Dear Penthouse booklets he kept in the bathroom.
The Clinton residence?
So, being Hefner's sex toys was not all that enjoyable an experience? Oh no, who would have thunk it?
The Sexual Revolution was a mistake.
The only thing it really revolutionized was the acceptability of women to be cum dumpsters for multiple partners. It's not an accident that the biggest supporters of it after World War II were pornographers, especially deviant vermin like Al Goldstein.
Which wave feminism was that? It got hard to keep them straight. When did it change from "womyn can fuck whoever they want" to "womyn have to be protected from all fucking"?
Right around the time the "grab 'em by the pussy" tape came out, and that's not an exaggeration. That's right when the narrative flipped from "slut walks" to "MeToo".
It's telling how many of you conservatives are just moral scolds when you get to brass tacks.
Why don't you require all women to wear a burqa like your Islamo brethren?
Yes, shriek, we know how much you hate being told that diddling little kids is wrong. It's why your first account got banned.
Sorry you're still seeing Rittenhouse in your nightmares, shrike.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Did Hefner have armed guards and snipers? Sounds like they regret the choice they made at the time.
They certainly ate something, and a lot.
My pro-life views are showing, but what an incredible improvement.
And Liz is still not a Republican?
Like many of us Liz is turned off by the Big Gov Trump Cult.
Liz is too rational to be one of Trump's deranged supporters. Most days the TDS brigade fills the comments with hateful accusations of leftism, and on a few days they praise her take. Why would any rational person want to join a club that treats people like that?
She's not going to be your friend, Sarc.
Amazing watching you to irrational retards discuss rationality when neither one of you could hold a rational thought for longer than a typical goldfish to forget something.
Here again is sarc crying about being called a leftist, he is, while calling others deranged Trump supporters/cultists.
No sarc, she'd want to join your gang, advocating for 20 years in jail for a protest while calling them nazis.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
I find it funny that Liz cites the aclu. They always lie. They are worse than reason editors
Here is Jack Marshall's take on the arrest of Hannah Dugan.
https://soc.culture.israel.narkive.com/o8aedcHq/pssst-somebody-tell-sen-klobuchar-that-she-needn-t-work-so-hard-at-embarrassing-minnesota-with-gov
Reason does not care about it. And given their love affair with ANY story that received ANY publicity, they could not find a way to make the judge sympathetic.
'What do you do with U.S. citizen children when a noncitizen parent is deported?'
I dunno. What do you do with U.S. citizen children when a parent is put in prison?
If available, the children live with a relative. In this case the father was able and willing to take the kids, but the government never gave him a chance.
Cite?
If that's what the two parents agree to, you can pay for the kids flight back.
Got a cite for that?
And if the parents disagree, the tie almost always goes to the mother. As feminists have always demanded.
Congrats.
Who are you, you slime pile of lying lefty shit, to determine who gets custody of a child?
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Liz Wolfe and Reason, along with other anti American open border media propagandists, are knowingly and intentionally lying (yet again), as 'cancer kid's mother (who was/is an illegal alien) deported her own daughter when she was legally deported by ICE.
Seems like many/most media propagandists just hate America.
"Mayoral candidate Jessica Ramos wants to manage the city's $112 billion budget, but she's failed to get her own fiscal house in order—defaulting on nearly $80,000 in student loans"
Just standing up to Trump, right?
Well, she is a Democrat. Misusing the taxpayers' money is mother's milk to her.
How else does she expect to get those loans paid off?
Slap some more duck-tape over the engine light.
The issue *is* there is no US Constitutional right to born citizenship of illegal invaders. The only thing confusing about the system is BS'ers F'ing it up.
14A begs to differ.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
Tell us what you think "subject to the jurisdiction" means? Hint: juris has something to do with law.
Molly doesn't understand due process nor jurisdiction.
There’s a lot of things Molly fails to comprehend. Her list is about as long as Sarc’s list.
Molly is the living embodiment of the failure of universities of she was granted a PhD as claimed. But every act blue employee makes these claims. Left has no issue lying.
So Molly has a phd, nelson is a harvard alum, and srg from oxford.
Truly staggering intellects, those.
"Staggering" - seems appropriate.
Are they all in Sarc's breakfast club?
They can be arrested, imprisoned and deported. How is that not being subject to US jurisdiction?
I understand that there are other interpretations. But this is not a settled issue. There is legitimate debate on the topic.
And I'm not arguing for what I want it to mean. I think it's not a great policy that children of tourists and illegals automatically get citizenship.
I can be arrested, tried and convicted for a murder I didn’t commit in Italy too, that doesn’t mean I’m a citizen when I’m there on a student visa.
It seems obvious to me that they meant subject in the old school “citizens are subjects of the government/crown/etc.”, but I agree, it is no where near settled.
If illegals hide from the law, or parade openly in sanctuary cities and churches, then they are demonstrating that they reject the jurisdiction of the US.
They can reject all they want (as can US citizens). That doesn't mean they aren't subject to it.
It is not possible that the writers of 14A intended for the children of illegal immigrants to be left out of citizenship.
AG
@AGHamilton29
The deportation reporting has gone completely off the rails. News orgs have become transcription services for activist attorneys without regard for the facts or context. It now takes time and research to determine the truth about each case because the reports are so unreliable.
Examples in the last week:
- see a headline about a man deported to Jamaica after being in America for 21 years only to find out he was a drug dealer who spent 15 of those years in prison for kidnapping
- see a headline about day laborers being picked up looking for work, only to find out that had charges that included assault, DUI, child abuse etc
- see a headline about a judge being arrested only to find out she actively tried to help a violent illegal alien avoid an arrest warrant
- see a headline about a 2 year old US citizen deported only to find out her mom, here illegally, was deported and chose to take the 2 year old with her.
This stuff might add to the narrative for some, but it makes everyone else tune these stories and the outlets behind them out.
Reminder of how AP described the Laken Riley murder.
https://x.com/WesternLensman/status/1916342055565201686
Activist lawyers want to become activist judges. Judges supposed to be a neutral party. Activism from the bench should be impeachable.
I am old enough to remember when the advertised purpose of sanctuary cities was to allow victims, witnesses, and opatients to come forward without fear of deportation.
It turns out it has always been about protecting criminals who hurt people.
Fuck, the WI judge dropped the MULTIPLE domestic abuse charges against the illegal she tried to protect.
And you have morons like Chris Christie saying the Trump immunity decision will protect her.
Trump has not broken people. He broke their ability to lie.
It's not hard to know the truth, journalists lie so it's safe to assume they're lying for somebody.
Ontario must pay for surgery to give trans resident both penis and vagina: appeal court
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ohip-coverage-penis-sparing-vaginoplasty
Canada doesn't even have surgeons doing this election surgery.
That gives "Go fuck yourself" a new meaning.
Let's take a moment to notice that we are already at "deporting US citizens". It will not stop with young children of illegal immigrants.
Obama assassinated a US citizen with a drone strike, so that makes it ok.
And here’s the typical daily lazy Sarc strawman.
Also more desperate pleading for female attention.
I’ve told Sarc before that no matter what he does, Molly is not going to fuck him.
Will the last person being deported turn out the lights on the way out?
Your side already blurred whatever "guardrails" might have been up in the last 15 years. You don't get to complain about it when your revolutionary vanguard gets removed.
Let's take a moment to notice Molly and sarc will lie about anything to push a narrative.
Hey, Molly, try this:
1. The feds deport an illegal woman.
2. The woman, who has legal custody of her baby, elects to take it with her.
3. Fuck you.
Except no US citizen was deported.
I think a little more caution and process is warranted in some cases like this where there is a child citizen. But I see no reason to think that this will extend to deporting citizens. The children aren't being deported. The parents are. What do you think is going to start happening to adult citizens?
When the people who are arrested and thrown onto planes are not allowed any due process, not even a chance to talk to an attorney, then it's only a matter of time before citizens are deported "by mistake." And it's already been made clear that if someone is deported "by mistake" the administration will scoff when the courts tell them to do something about it. It's only been four months. A lot more is going to happen in the next four years.
You've now repeated the no due process lie at least 4 times.
She ignored her required court hearings dumdum.
Are you volunteering? We could profit a lot if slimy shits like you weren't here.
Why do you care?
Getting exactly what you insist you want is bad?
All you and you're party has done for years is praise how foreign countries operate (universal healthcare, gov-housing, MORE socialism, etc...) and lobbied to destroy the USA.
Except we’re not you lying sack of shit.
"""Their mothers, who were illegally in this country, were deported. The children went with their mothers," Rubio continued""
This is what I call a down range problem. If the mother came here legally it would not be a problem. I'm never a fan of when people set themselves up for problems.
On the other side as well.
In 2012, a 'pen and phone' could've been used to ensure more TdA and MS-13 members didn't get into the country. It could've also made sure legal minors with cancer could get treatment or whatever. Instead, it locked (illegal) immigrants into student loans... to much fanfare.
In 2016, a compromise was offered to get immigration reform in exchange for defense cuts. The reform could've been used to ensure more TdA and MS-13 members didn't get into the country. It could've also made sure legal minors with cancer could get treatment or whatever. Instead, the people offered the deal refused and violently protested the scumbag who would dare offer such a deal.
There is always a point at which more cannot be done. The closer you get to that point before doing "something", the worse the "something" you have to do gets. It's not strictly or necessarily about "sending a message" it's, like the budget, about austerity.
China has been working out tariff deals, demanding evidence of them doing so be deleted.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/chinese-delegation-spotted-entering-treasury-department-demands-photos-be-deleted-report
Someone explain to me how Santos can get 7 years, but a child rapist often gets months or no time.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/former-rep-george-santos-sentenced-more-7-years-prison
It's (D)ifferent, plus most judges aren't going to have identity theft charges placed against them.
Donnie is going to pardon Santos before soon and you know it.
They are both cut from the same filthy cloth.
Remind me again just how exactly you got your original account permabanned here?
He forgot the password. Or the IT guy hates him. Or something.
No due process?
Fuck you, you Joe "Pardons-R-Us" Biden diaper-sniffer.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Santos went way out of bounds for what is standard acceptable lying by politicians. I guess it's an issue of volume.
If we has an illegal immigrant from Kidnapistan he'd be walking free already.
76% of fed workers who voted Kamala said they would ignore a valid order given under Trump.
https://dailycaller.com/2025/04/24/democrat-voting-federal-bureaucrats-trump-orders-poll/
There is no deep state though.
Looks like that should be an internal poll for determining the next round of layoffs.
I bet Elon's IT boys can trace the respondents to that original poll.
Insurrection!!!
Ever wondered how the DC Circuit is filled with left leaning activists? Turns out congress worked with D.C. to undo the constitutional president's appointments clause.
https://thefederalist.com/2025/04/23/dc-courts-are-such-a-mess-because-leftist-judges-not-potus-pick-their-colleagues/
But starting in 1973 (and slightly before), with the advent of D.C.’s “Home Rule,” Congress radically altered not only the structure and jurisdiction of the district’s courts but also the method by which their judges were selected. Congress ostensibly enacted these “reforms” to give local leaders a greater say in who sat on D.C.’s newly created courts and to make the process “nonpartisan” and “apolitical.”
...
In a constitutionally questionable move, Congress stripped the president of the ability to nominate his preferred candidate to take the bench. And instead, Congress created a system where anyone who wants to serve as a judge on D.C.’s “local” courts must first apply to a statutorily mandated “Judicial Nominating Commission.”
The JNC is comprised of seven members, one of whom the president selects, while D.C.’s mayor and D.C.’s bar (itself an organ of D.C.’s local courts) each select two members. D.C.’s council selects one member too.
Even more bizarrely, the chief judge of the district’s “federal” court appoints a sitting federal judge “serving in the District” to serve as the final member of the JNC.
This means that these judges are selecting other judges! Of the applicants it reviews, the JNC must select three candidates to fill each vacancy and then forward those candidates’ names to the president.
But here’s where things get even crazier: If the president refuses to nominate one of the three JNC-recommended individuals within 60 days of receiving their names, then the JNC itself can pick someone, nominate that person, and appoint (after Senate confirmation) that person to serve on the court.
Are these federal courts or D.C. Municipal Courts.
Municipal courts don't require presidential nominations.
Indeed, and setting up a municipal court system outside of Article III arises from Congress's Article I power to legislative for the District "in all cases whatsoever" See Art. I, §8, cl. 17, quoted in Ortiz v. United States, slip op. at 15 (June 22, 2018)
If the judges fall under the appointment clause, which they apparently do, then they must follow under those rules.
Hmm, smells like bananas.
John Hasson
@SonofHas
Pete Buttigieg says there’s a “discount” for adopting Black kids (Around 1:15)
He catches himself and then says he means there’s no deposit, but…YIKE
Video
https://x.com/SonofHas/status/1915159087441908048
The guy is an idiot.
Even Pothole Pete understands that black kids are some of the least picked kids for adoption. Most families want a white kid, regardless of the media propaganda or celebrity purse pets.
He is correct. Just a Supply/Demand issue.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
You’d know, based on your proclivities.
So, is there a discount for black kiddie porn?
Ask Denny Hastert. Conservatives make the best perverts.
Why don’t you, Shrike? He is your hero, after all.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-wipe of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Girl dad = male feminist.
If you're a straight, white, conservative, male, father of girls who is beyond completely content to drown himself in his wife's other consenting adult's poon 5X a day and would slit the throat of anyone who looks at your kid sideways, you should still understand this is how 'girl dad' comes across. Never in history have you needed to be a 'girl dad' to be proud of a daughter and it doesn't make you any better or special than a 'boy dad' or just a dad of either or both genders. All it does is make you awkwardly socially creepy about the fact that your child is a girl. Like people who belong to the Corvette club.
Best case, you think you're great because you're a dad who can braid hair. Tween girls manage to learn it the same way tween boys manage to learn to lash things together with rope all the time. Quit being creepy about your daughter.
>>All it does is make you awkwardly socially creepy about the fact that your child is a girl.
my take as well.
DID YOU HEAR WHAT TRUMP SAID?!?!?!?!?!!?!
"Pam Bondi didn't say, 'It's probably a crime to accuse the president of committing a crime after he breaks the law'"
[...]
"Claim:
A screenshot authentically shows a "Fox News Sunday" TV chyron quoting U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi saying, "It's probably a crime to accuse the president of committing a crime after he breaks the law."
Context:
The graphic, known in the TV industry as a chyron, was fake, and Bondi did not say these words. Rather, the graphic originated from a Facebook page managed by a user who describes himself as a comedian and satirist.
While it's true that Bondi appeared for an interview with Bream on "Fox News Sunday" on April 6, she did not say the quoted words about the president. Searches of Bing, DuckDuckGo, Google and Yahoo failed to turn up any results from news media outlets reporting on the matter as fact.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/pam-bondi-didn-t-say-it-s-probably-a-crime-to-accuse-the-president-of-committing-a-crime-after-he-breaks-the-law/ar-AA1DISJq?cvid=269d51d2279b4d4bb7166bcb83dd46d3&ei=47
""Searches of Bing, DuckDuckGo, Google and Yahoo failed to turn up any results from news media outlets reporting on the matter as fact.""
This is something I check when someone makes a claim. If it's true (trueish) multiple outlets will report it.
Good point - TY.
Facts? Do you want facts, or do you want to Resist!?
"Letitia James faces criminal referral by Trump administration for alleged mortgage fraud"
[...]
"The Federal Housing Finance Agency has referred New York Attorney General Letitia James to the Justice Department for alleged mortgage fraud.
FHFA Director William Pulte sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche alleging that James "falsified" records to secure home loans for a Norfolk, Virginia, property that she said was her "principal residence" while she was a New York prosecutor.
She also purchased a five-family home in Brooklyn and “consistently misrepresented the same property as only having four units in both building permit applications and numerous mortgage documents and applications,” the letter claimed.
Because she listed the unit as a four-unit dwelling instead of five, she could have reduced her mortgage rate by as much as 1% and had lower monthly payments under the federal Home Assistance Modification Program, Pulte said.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/letitia-james-faces-criminal-referral-by-trump-administration-for-alleged-mortgage-fraud/ar-AA1CZOFm?ocid=BingNewsSerp
She's only a little bit bent.
Democrats should never be charged with their crimes. Why do you support revenge?!? - sarc.
didn't that used to be illegal? I think I heard something about it a few years ago.
At least 34 felonies and a half billion dollar judgement will be required to protect the people of New York.
Sometimes common sense dictates doing something illegal. Lawyers and judges can decide what's legal, but not what should be done.
Common sense is knowing that if you do something illegal it is likely you will pay the price.
If you do something illegal and then complain about paying the price, it is called stupidity.
The price should be 0, because everybody involved knows it. Anybody who tries to make someone pay a price for doing the right thing should be treated illegally and with extreme prejudice.
Life isn't some game wherein following the rules is paramount. Life is the real thing, and some rules need to be ignored. See the movie The Village, which is about someone going against the rules he made himself.
Doing 'the right thing' according to whom? Notably, there is usually some disagreement over what 'the right thing to do' actually is.
The irony, of course, is that moral relativism is rife on the left and yet now that it cuts against them they want to be moral objectivists. I'm going to go ahead and not trust their new found moral objectivity.
Well, each individual needs to figure that out for himself. But I don't think there are many people who will claim that following the law is always and in every situation the right thing to do.
Absolutely, in fact I'm one of them. Needless to say, though, that does not make me immune from prosecution when I break laws I consider unjust.
That said, in this particular case, I am not willing to allow emotion to override reason. It is clear to me that this case is being put forward to override logical thinking with emotive knee jerks, and as such it needs heightened scrutiny through my moral and ethical framework. After looking at what is available, my conclusion is that the parents fucked around and they found out. That sucks for their kid, I empathize there, but then I would never do this to my own child so my empathy is also limited.
The only issue I take with this case in particular is the administrations claim that the mother wanted the daughter to go with her. While I think that is probably true as a parent myself, it's worth questioning that particular fact as it emanates from the state and as such is inherently unreliable.
Needless to say, though, that does not make me immune from prosecution when I break laws I consider unjust.
More critically, algorithmic and systemic or second-order thinking is more abundant than ever. The idea that there are more exceptions to every system than ever is, at best, a slow walk to tearing the system down and, at worst, an attempt to subvert or co-opt the system to other ends.
Even if you don't trust The State to tell you that the mother wanted the kid to come with them (setting aside or maybe peering through the 70+% of the government that says they would act to deliberately thwart The Administration as distinct from The State in an act of deliberate subversion), presumably CBP is no more or less willing or competent to deport the kid any more than DCFS wants to take them and deliver them to the domestic parent.
Wouldn't it be rich if the CBP agent is 100.00% willing to keep the kid with the domestic parent and the parent being deported is of the "I saw what the administration did to kids that were separated from their parents at the border! You're not taking and losing my child! They stay with me!"
I'm going to go ahead and not trust their new found moral objectivity.
New found, niche, convenient, impractical, and inconsistent with their other newly-forgotten/previously-new-found morally objective stances.
"moral relativism is rife on the left and yet now that it cuts against them they want to be moral objectivists."
This is an excellent point.
That would be fine if laws in general were reasonable and consistently enforced. I would venture to guess that a great majority of illegal activities go uninvestigated and un-punished.
There are several separate issues in those deportation cases, and Liz is wrong to conflate them.
The first issue is immigration itself. That is irrelevant. I'm an open borders guy, but it's a political question under our system of government, and however immoral I think it is, I also think enticing illegal immigrants with welfare, free luxury hotel lodging, free food, and cash to boot, is immoral. I don't get a say in either, and neither is as immoral as other government actions. I'm not going to die on that hill.
The second issue is breaking up families. You ignore that ALL criminal convictions separate families. If these mothers had been convicted of burglary, the families would have been broken up just as assuredly as here. What's the alternative, send spouses and children to jail too? Let criminals free to continue supporting their families with more crime?
The third issue is how much time you give criminals to make arrangements once found guilty. Suppose these mothers had been found charged with burglary instead of illegal immigration. They would have made arrangements ahead of time, before the trial and sentencing. All this weeping and moaning about the short time they had is appropriate in one sense; they should have been given more time after ICE picked them up. But due process is not a moral definition, it is a legal definition, and deportation of an illegal immigrant does not require the same due process of a suspected burglar.
This reporting is too biased and partisan to be reliable. WaPo, Politico, and Meet the Press? Why not throw in the NYT while you're at it? Could you pick a better set of sob sisters? Liz, if you want sympathy, pick reporting which doesn't scream TDS.
You forget that those children's ages tell a different story. Two and four years old means the parents had two and four years notice, not just minutes. Imagine a notorious murder, say assassinating the President, who lives on the lam for years before being caught. He's had plenty of time to make arrangements. Are we supposed to sympathize when he's finally tracked down and arrested? Does he need more time to help his wife and kids?
The core problem with all these immigration issues is how lax Obama and Biden were in enforcing the laws on the books, and how complicit the courts were in letting Obama and Biden use prosecutorial discretion to not enforce the laws on the books. Now a new President, who campaigned on enforcing those laws, does enforce them, and families get broken up because one parent has committed a crime which previous administrations ignored.
Life sucks. Governments make it suck worse. Bad partisan reporting exaggerates the suck.
The core problem with all these immigration issues is how lax Obama and Biden were in enforcing the laws on the books, and how complicit the courts were in letting Obama and Biden use prosecutorial discretion to not enforce the laws on the books.
Not just lax and not just Obama and Biden. Every Congress under all three+ administrations/four terms; and specifically and selectively manipulative to this and similar ends.
The "pen and phone" in 2012 could've stopped TdA and MS-13 members from entering *and* given illegal immigrant cancer moms some relief. Instead, it locked (illegal) immigrants into student loans.
Trump has proven that the border can be closed using only existing law and executive discretion. As to deportation, which is a separate issue, he's facing legal challenges based on process not the ultimate power of the president to deport. SCOTUS will have to thread a lot of needles but ultimately little will change except possibly birthright citizenship which I doubt could be retroactive.
Birthright citizenship probably won't change, as pretty much any likely replacement is much, much worse.
I'm an open borders guy
lol
You’re more of an open container type of guy, Sarc.
Dipshit. Open borders, not boarders.
Sorry bub, but that's not allowed. The choices are supporting immigrants taking advantage of the welfare state or stopping immigration. Immigration reform is not on the table. You're boxed into a false dichotomy. Live with it.
You lie about this constantly.
Almost everyone here has told you directly that if there was no welfare state, they wouldn't give a shit about the borders. You have then often defended the welfare of illegal immigrants.
So fuck off leftist.
The Trade Myths that refuse to die
https://arnoldkling.substack.com/p/the-trade-myths-that-refuse-to-die
Myth One: We don’t have a manufacturing sector any more
One myth is that American manufacturing has been devastated by trade. The evidence for this is the decline in the American work force engaged in manufacturing production work, from somewhere over 30 percent of American workers in the middle of the twentieth century to somewhere around 5 percent today.
But counting workers is the wrong metric. America is outstanding at food production. But in terms of employment, our agriculture industry is even more “devastated” than manufacturing. The majority of Americans 250 years ago were in farming. Now it is only about 2 or 3 percent.
Since 1980, American manufacturing output has doubled. Manufacturing has not been devastated. We are making more goods with fewer workers.
Lies. Everyone knows that jobs are what matters.
what would you do if a bot took your job here?
Sarc would probably drink. Oh, wait, he does that anyway.
More accurate to call your post Trade Strawmen.
Since 1980, American manufacturing output has doubled
So we won’t run out of stuff next month?
And yet manufacturing jobs have gone down by about half.
End robot unemployment today!
And yeah, this is good for 'the economy' but notably it's bad for human beings. Those jobs didn't just disappear, they went to foreign workers who manufacture most of what you buy.
>>What do you do with U.S. citizen children when a noncitizen parent is deported?
deal with it appropriately? if he's due back he'll be back calm the ever loving fuck down
>>It is true that these women are in this country illegally, and thus may well be deportable. But the government hasn't shown us any evidence that these moms are "the most vile human beings imaginable"
for example these are not competing ideas about which you should complain in writing. sentence A is the fact part. sentence B is you whining because she wasn't offered seating choice
>>My pro-life views are showing
yes it is a blessing you are still correct on life.
>>whether to keep pursuing a Ukraine-Russia settlement agreement
this nonsense has been ongoing since Florence Nightingale was servicing wounded Brits in the 1850s think everybody's gonna be happy with Russia owning Crimea now?
As I've heard from somebody else, Ukraine has had 10 years to liberate Crimea.
They have not come close to doing so.
ya no kidding & if you take the word of the guy embedded with the Russkies who was on Tucker the other day they're not the nicest of liberators, either
Neither side is terribly good. Yes, Russia invaded and are wrong. But it's been years. I'm tired of us getting sucked into forever wars.
Who would have thought, back around 1980 or so, that we would be defending ex-Soviet countries who are themselves just as corrupt as 'Mother Russia'.
Our government here in the U.S. is just so absolutely and thoroughly corrupt when it comes to international matters. Senators can earn millions of dollars from foreign interests and no one bats an eye. We can send billions of dollars in weapons to a foreign country directly connected to a U.S. President's family and no one cares.
>>friends aren't allowed to criticize friends quickly rot from the inside," writes Jesse Singal on his Substack, referring to Bari Weiss
criticizing Bari Weiss seems one of the easier things to do I don't see the problem?
Does Bari Weiss have a standing "I am beyond criticism." policy (a la Taylor Lorenz) or is this a case of mumbling "youreacowardifyouputyourhandsup" and then throwing a jab at someone who's not ready or paying attention?
lol. I don't think I remember when we were supposed to like Bari Weiss now...
>>Two filings in Queens state supreme court from 2019 show Ramos, a state senator from the borough, defaulted on a pair of loans
I'm sure she was just confused by Brandon telling the Supreme Court they could block him but they could not stop him remember when you guys were all like "hell yeah, B! defy those judges! excuse those loans!"
We are seeing the same pattern over and over again: The government makes allegations against an immigrant, the MAGAs take that allegation as fact, and then claim the person was not owed due process because of the fact that they assumed was true. Nowhere are the MAGAs interested at all to let the person defend themselves.
Democeat fact free appeal to emotion trumps actual facts.- Molly
It's not called defense when you're in someone else's nation un-invited.
It's called invading.
Course that's all leftards do. Their 'right' to your medical labors. Their 'right' to your house. Their 'right' to your paycheck. Their 'right' to whatever they want.....
Self-entitled, selfish, greedy, criminally minded "conquer and consume" what is others stuff endlessly.
It's no mystery how 70%+ of the prison population is registered Democrats.
They are entirely against the pursuit of Justice or anyone's Liberty but their own.
If you have an active deportation order, you do not have any defense.
Again same thing. You are assuming there is an active deportation order, and thus denying them their rights to challenge that. They have already deported people without deportation orders. But this is much bigger than immigration. This is about the general ability of the government to detain you without a warrant or due process.
However, the key thing to remember is that law enforcement can arrest without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe a crime is being committed.
The "Maryland man" very much had one.
Hennepin County DA introducing an explicitly race-based justice system does not even warrant a mention? It officially begins today.
I guess civil rights violations by a DA are too local now.
if Soros paid for the civil right violating DA this place will back him.
Liz, the father was nowhere to be seen at the hearing - he's also an illegal - and the other asked for the kid to go with her.
This is a nothingburger.
>denying the 4-year-old child—who has metastatic cancer—access to his medication
No one is denying you from bringing it to them.
Hell, Liz can fly it to them personally if this upsets her so.