Trump Administration Admits ICE Arrested Mahmoud Khalil Without a Warrant
The administration's lawyers claim that this was justified by Khalil's likelihood of escape.

On Thursday, Trump administration officials admitted that Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil was arrested without a warrant. Khalil, a green card holder, has been detained since March, when Secretary of State Marco Rubio cancelled his visa over nebulous allegations of "pro-terrorist" speech.
This admission came as part of a lengthy legal battle over the government's attempt to deport Khalil without criminal charges or due process.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested Khalil on March 8 and quickly took him to a detention center in Louisiana. Administration officials have said he was arrested in connection with pro-Palestine protests at Columbia. "This administration is not going tolerate individuals having the privilege of studying in our country and then siding with pro-terrorist organizations that have killed Americans," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in March. "We have a zero-tolerance policy for siding with terrorists, period." On April 11, an immigration judge in Louisiana sided with the administration, stating that the "department has met its burden to establish removability by clear and convincing evidence."
In a Thursday filing, government lawyers admitted that officers who detained Khalil conducted a "warrantless arrest." The attorneys argued that the Department of Homeland Security wasn't required to get a warrant because they had reason to believe that Khalil was likely to "escape" before one would be obtained.
"He refused to cooperate with the agents, even though they exercised discretion and decided not to arrest him on a misdemeanor charge for failure to possess his green card," reads the filing. "He verbally informed the agents that he was going to leave the scene, even though his wife had not yet returned with his conditional residence card….Thus, the exception to the warrant requirement applied and the agents were within lawful authority to arrest the respondent."
Khalil's legal team views this admission as a victory. "The government now finally admits what the whole world already saw and knows: that ICE had no warrant to apprehend Mahmoud Khalil," Ramzi Kassem, one of Khalil's lawyers, said in a press release. "No one should take seriously the government's patent lie, which it offers for the first time many weeks after the fact, that somehow Mahmoud was anything other than compliant when ICE agents unlawfully abducted him under cover of darkness."
Khalil is far from the first legal resident to face deportation for pro-Palestine speech. Last month Rubio said that he had cancelled around 300 student visas. "We gave you a visa to come and study and get a degree, not become a social activist that tears up our university campuses," Rubio told reporters. "And if we've given you a visa and you decide to do that, we're going to take it away,"
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
Warrantless arrests. "Oopsie" deportations. No due process. And that's just the first four months. Wonder what the next four years will bring.
Yup. The playbook is always to start with unsavoury or unsympathetic characters to accustomise the citizenry to such unconstitutional actions
It is very helpful when the Left jumps all over every illegal as if they were the second coming of Jesus.
I can see how that would offend you being that you worship Trump as Political Jesus.
Stupid little fuck.
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement doesn't need a warrant to arrest a green card holder, just like the Maine State Police didn't need a warrant every time they arrested you for impaired driving.
This is a weird stance for a little Nazi like you who celebrated jailing J6'ers without charges for years. Really demonstrates what an enormous hypocrite you and your evil pal Diet Shrike are.
J6 rioters were all charged. None were jailed without charges.
And if they didn’t want to go to jail, maybe they shouldn’t have smashed their eay into the Capitol.
Unfortunately the defenders showed restraint and only Ashli Babbitt got what she deserved.
So we've established you don't think it's a bad thing for the government to shoot unarmed protestors, so I assume you think Khalil deserved a bullet rather than deportation.
Curious stance.
She wasn’t an unarmed protester. She was part of a violent mob attempting to breach a position protected by armed guards.
The “they were just tourists” nonsense requires an insane amount of suspension of disbelief.
So she had a weapon?
This justifies an officer who stated on the record he couldn't see and fired blindly into a crowd?
Where 6 other officers were on the same side as Babbitt?
You remain a retard Nelson.
No no, I meant just what I said.
You explicitly state it is fine to shoot unarmed protestors. She was certainly unarmed, not to mention a small woman versus multiple cops armed with...you guessed it...non lethal sidearms as well!
So, you feel that Khahil should have been shot while protesting as well of course. You wouldn't want to be intellectually dishonest or inconsistent, right? Or are spokespeople for literal terrorist organizations that kill thousands of people around the world somehow special where they deserve special considerations from law enforcement not to blow them away without trial?
“ You explicitly state it is fine to shoot unarmed protestors”
Not at all. She was in the middle of a group assaulting a defended position. She was very actively involved. She wasn’t a protester, she was a rioter (or invader, if you prefer). Your contention is that shouldn’t matter, which is patently ridiculous.
She was in the middle of a group that was actively threatening not only the life and safety of the officers, but the people they were protecting. Lethal force is completely justified in that position. She did what she did and justifiably got shot for it.
“ So, you feel that Khahil should have been shot while protesting as well of course”
That’s insane. He wasn’t threatening anyone. And before you claim otherwise, there’s a Constitutional standard for what constitutes unprotected threatening speech. He didn’t meet it. And even threatening speech isn’t usually a justification for lethal force by an officer. Saying vile things and believing vile things isn’t illegal, never mind deserving of being countered with lethal force.
Is this really how your brain works? “I like Ashli Babbitt and this guy thinks it was justified to kill her, so I’ll take this person that I (quite wrongly) think he likes and say that he deserved to be shot.”.
But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and treat your comment like a serious one.
Babbitt threatened the safety of armed police officers and got shot. What was this guy doing that justified lethal force?
“ You wouldn't want to be intellectually dishonest or inconsistent, right?”
No, but you seem fine with it. Unless you can explain what would justify lethal force at a college protest?
“ Or are spokespeople for literal terrorist organizations that kill thousands of people around the world somehow special where they deserve special considerations from law enforcement not to blow them away without trial?”
First, of course, he wasn’t a spokesperson for any terrorist group. He was cheerleading for some very loathsome groups, but he wasn’t actually part of them, as far as anyone has shown.
As far as killing spokespeople for terrorist groups, they have historically been immune from not just killing, but even arrest Garry Adams comes to mind. He was an IRA terrorist who became the spokesman for Shin Fein and was part of the Good Friday peace negotiations. And the Brits would have LOVED to put him in a pine box.
“ from law enforcement not to blow them away without trial?”
There is a very small set of situations in which law enforcement can use deadly force. None of those situations was happening at Columbia.
You seem to be unable to differentiate between “this guy should be dead” (an emotion that I actually share with you) and “we can kill this guy” (this is where we part ways).
The maddow level rationalization you use to justify the murder of an unarmed person is wild.
She was less armed than pretty much all illegals.
So, CLEARLY, we need to not arrest and deport them. Drop them where they stand and toss the bodies into the sea.
"J6 rioters were all charged. None were jailed without charges."
You misspelled, "protesters."
Ashli Babbit, an unarmed woman got what she deserved?
You would've fit in well with Himmler and Beria's little groups.
Rioters. The smashed doors and windows, empty tear gas canisters, and overturned barriers should have given you (and them) a clue that this wasn’t an unguided, off-hour tour of the Capitol.
And yes, Ashli Babbitt, who was in the middle of the group trying to breach a defended position, got exactly what violent rioters should get.
She was a scumbag and a rioter who chose to fuck around. She found out.
You've just explained an entire summer of BLM and a riot outside the WH that forced Trump into the bunker.
You remain retarded Nelson.
Which BLM protests? There were tens of thousands of them. Or are you taking the ones where people should have been arrested and convicted and trying to smear all 10,000 with that broad brush?
And what “riot” outside the White House? And please use your rioter/peaceful protester standard from J6.
5/29/20. That one. Where they injured Secret Service agents, tried to burn down a church (Trump made a mistake putting the fire out. Fuck that church), and forced Trump to be taken down to the bunker, which the Left found hilarious.
1/6, unlike ALL of the BLM riots, was mostly peaceful.
You're retarded Nelson.
You realize the vast majority of people were, in fact, just protesting?
She was with a bunch of other insurrectionists trying to smash their way into the Speaker's lobby in an effort to prevent the transfer of power. They had already made sure it wasn't a peaceful transfer.
If a mob was smashing its way in to anyone's office- an office that was known to be protected by armed guards- the security charged with defending it would be derelict if they didn't use every tool at their disposal to keep it secure. This is just dumb. I feel bad that she was dumb enough to have bought into the preposterous drivel about the election being stolen, but my sympathy only extends as far as that. I'm sorry she was a fucking moron. She should have known that she trying to climb through the smashed glass of a secure door that she was demanding to be shot. There was no other option other than to let the mob break in even further. Poor dumb girl.
Most were jailed for months prior to seeing their first judge retard. Most were denied bail on a group not individual basis retars. Then they were threatened with 20 years for a misapplied law retard. Then one unarmed one was shot in her face retard.
And even when scotus told the DoJ they couldn't use the law, DoJ under Garland scrambled to keep the pleas based on those threats valid.
Fuck off Nelson.
“ Most were jailed for months prior to seeing their first judge retard”
But not without charges, which is the goalpost you just moved. Having months before a hearing isn’t uncommon in the legal system. They were treated just like every other accused criminal.
“ Most were denied bail on a group not individual basis retars”
According to … who? ZeroHedge? Some other wingnut publication? As you have proved repeatedly, just because you believe it doesn’t mean it’s true. In fact, it’s a good indication it’s false.
“ Then they were threatened with 20 years for a misapplied law retard”
What? Overcharging in the criminal justice system? That’s a brand-new thing that never happened before J6!
Even you aren’t that stupid, right?
“ Then one unarmed one was shot in her face retard.”
Trying to breach a defended position guarded by law enforcement officers with guns. She got exactly what her behavior earned her. She was a violent rioter and got shot attacking a guarded position. Shocking.
“ And even when scotus told the DoJ they couldn't use the law”
Which SCOTUS case was that?
“ DoJ under Garland scrambled to keep the pleas based on those threats valid.”
So they admitted to crimes, but weren’t criminals? How does that work, exactly?
So you are retarded.
The charges are read at the first hearing, they were held for months (in one case over a fucking year) without their charges being read.
You're a retard Nelson.
Then you're ignorant to the no bail. Ignorant to misapplication of law and even defend it. Breaches are not capital offenses. Then justify plea deals based on false charges. Lol.
And then you don't even know the USSC ruled on the use of disruption of congress?!?
Way to prove you're fucking retarded.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4745821-supreme-court-jan-6-obstruction-charge/
Then the cases regarding abuse of J6 defendants.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/13/us/politics/jan-6-jail-contempt.html
You literally come here day after day to prove just how fucking stupid you are. It is amazing
And 70% charged were charged with no violence or rioting, merely parading. This included people not there that day or who never entered.
You're a standard retarded fascist leftist.
You're a standard retarded fascist leftist.
Now now, lets be fair. Nelson is far more retarded than most of the others.
“ The charges are read at the first hearing, they were held for months (in one case over a fucking year) without their charges being read.”
There is a huge difference between being held without charges and not having your charges read in court. If they are being held and there is a charge that is listed, that is not “being held without charges”.
Especially if someone has a lawyer, there is a long and drawn-out process that happens throughout the case. Before, during, and after they appear in court. Claiming someone who has had continuances and postponements is being “held without charges” is dishonest and untrue.
“ And then you don't even know the USSC ruled on the use of disruption of congress?!?”
Wow. For once you are actually right. There was one type of crime that the Supreme Court said wasn’t a valid application of the law. Not that he was held without charges.
This is called “due process”. So if you’re looking for me to oppose it, you’re going to be disappointed. And please note (as mentioned before), the accusation was that J6 defendants were held without charge. This is a defendant who was charged, but through due process was found to be charged erroneously. That’s a good thing. That’s the system working. That’s how due process is supposed to go.
“ Then the cases regarding abuse of J6 defendants.”
So one J6 defendant wasn’t provided with medical treatment? Are you this outraged when it’s some murderer being denied medical treatment?
But either way, that was an abuse by jail officials. And, once again, due process did what it was supposed to. That doesn’t mean they weren’t criminals. It just means that the jail also acted like criminals and got caught. That’s a good thing.
But you once again brought in a bunch of unrelated stuff to avoid the actual lie that I responded to by Mother’s Lament: “you who celebrated jailing J6'ers without charges for years”.
There were no J6ers hailed without charges, nor were any of them denied due process, which your links amply prove.
So exactly what point are you trying to make? My point is that the far right has a mythology around J6 that doesn’t connect with reality.
They were criminals. They got due process. They were incarcerated. They were pardoned (completely legally) by Trump.
But that in no way means they weren’t criminals imprisoned without charges.
And now Nelson explains he has no fucking clue how our legal system works, the right to a speedy trial, or any other rights.
You are an amazing piece of shit Nelson.
"None were jailed without charges."
This is a utter fucking lie.
They absolutely were. You stupid fucking fifty-centers think this is Huffpo or something and you can just come here and make up shit and nobody will challenge it.
And virtually none of them were "rioters". The Democratic Party prosecutors deliberately withheld evidence that exonerated these people, like Jacob Chansley. Meanwhile, the FBI agents who broke the windows, set up the gallows, planted the pipe bombs and were the only people caught on camera calling for "insurrection', or to "Hang Mike Pence", were never charged, or, like Ray Epps, given a token sentence.
The whole thing, from top to bottom was a Democratic Party insurrection designed to legitimize your theft of the election.
“ This is an utter fucking lie.”
Really? Who was jailed without charges? Because the answer seems to be “No one”. Unless you have a case? A name? Anything that isn’t your feelings?
“ And virtually none of them were "rioters".”
Oh, I see. If it’s BLM or a protest at Trump’s first inauguration, it’s a riot. But smashing into the Capitol, stepping over the wreckage of doors and windows, climbing across overturned barriers, past spent tear gas canisters, and trying to force their way into defended areas is “tourism”?
Your double standard is painfully transparent.
“Meanwhile, the FBI agents who broke the windows, set up the gallows, planted the pipe bombs and were the only people caught on camera calling for "insurrection', or to "Hang Mike Pence", were never charged”
Probably because that is as true as QAnon and Pizzagate and the rest of the fringe-generated conspiracy theories that are always proved to be bullshit.
“ The whole thing, from top to bottom was a Democratic Party insurrection designed to legitimize your theft of the election.”
Literally every single thing in that sentence is laughably, provably, and unsurprisingly (considering the source) complete bullshit. It’s like you’re a parody account, but I think you truly believe every bit of it.
Lucas Denny you retarded fuck.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2022/03/11/wait-thats-how-long-a-jan-6-defendant-has-been-detained-with-no-indictment-n2604457
Violated his rights over and over and over.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/texas-man-sentenced-prison-assaulting-law-enforcement-officers-during-jan-6-capitol
“ Denney was arrested on Dec. 13, 2021, in the Brackettville, Texas, area. He pleaded guilty on March 17, 2022, to an indictment charging him with assaulting resisting, or impeding officers using a dangerous weapon”
So in four months he was arrested, charged, had hearings, and pleaded guilty? I’m missing the part where he was somehow held without charges. That’s really fast for a violent crime.
And if we’re using the “terrible people don’t deserve due process” theory you embrace, he was associated with the Three Percenters, who are basically the same thing as Antifa, but on the far right. But that’s different, according to you?
Now Nelson prove he can't fucking read, doesn't know defendants rights or realize how they are violated, all laid out in the article.
Nelson is a piece of shit. Lol.
Look how he even justifies the abuses of his rights because of a group he belongs too.
Such a piece of shit Nelson.
Of course, only fuckwitted cultists think that anyone who disagrees with them is on the left, and almost none of them understand any principles that aren't based on deference to Dear Leader
Again, mourn more for the slug who hates Jews and committed numerous civil rights violations on campus.
Have you ever thought you might be on the wrong side?
Different legal standards for different people, depending on who it is? So for you, equal treatment under the law is a bad thing?
Have you ever thought you might be on the wrong side?
What legal standards. Let's see if you can articulate it Nelson.
Every person gets due process. Part of that due process is that if the government makes an accusation and a judge makes a ruling (like in Garcia’s case), the government must abide by that ruling. All of it.
It’s not that difficult a concept. If the government makes an accusation, they must prove it before applying any penalties.
There is no “look how awful this person is” exception to due process. It’s literally the core concept of our justice system, that every accused gets to defend themselves. Even the sleazy ones. Even the cruel ones. Even the violent ones. Even the ones who have been found guilty of something before. Even the unseeable ones. Every. Single. One.
He is a guest here.
The visa can be withdrawn. Period. Judges have no say in it whatsoever. Once it is withdrawn, then the subhuman should be removed, improving our country immensely.
Define due process Nelson. Youre using words and concepts you don't know. Also a very weird statement given right above you celebrate the violations against J6ers.
What is the due process for illegals or those on visas.
Listen, you lying cunt, I do not mourn for Khalil who is indeed a slug - he may even be more of a slug than you
I am concerned about principles such as not letting the US turn into a dictatorship where what the Executive wills matters more than the Constitution, and that if the Executive wants to punish individuals for some status or act, they do not have the unlimited authority to do so.
You evidently think that if Dear Leader wills it, it is fact or law. Hence you're a different kind of slug.
"Of course, only fuckwitted cultists"
You've got a lot of experience in a cult, fuckwit.
Hey Shrike, you’re on the left. No cultism required to see that.
Wrong, cunt. I am too much of a fan of capitalism and generally free markets and opposed to centralised and distributive economies to be on the left. But this is too complicated or sophisticated for your tiny cracker mind to grasp.
What I am not is some mindless cultist.
"Of course, only fuckwitted cultists think that anyone who disagrees with them is on the left"
You're beyond the fucking left. Pol Pot is a right-wing radical compared to where you sit.
Fuck off you POS. I have consistently advocated for capitalism and generally free markets here, as you well know, you fascist cunt, and I am unalterably opposed to Communism on a variety of grounds, theoretical and practical, but you're such a dishonest authoritarian scumbag that to hide your true fascist nature you have to pretend that people who disagree with you are the extremists.
It is your consistent stances being on the left that makes us think youre on the left.
Funny how you retards cry about being called on the left as you scream cultists.
You think anyone who disagrees with you is a Nazi . . . so there.
Not true nor have I ever said that. So fuck off, cunt.
Except Trump's thugs aren't limiting themselves to illegals, and seem determined to break the law even if their targets are legit. Anyone involved in sending prisoners to El Salvador is guilty of crimes against humanity. I don't need to be on the left to think that just maybe that's a bad idea.
No it doesn't.
You're saying cops shouldn't ticket speeders because that normalizes tickets and then they'll be arresting murderers next and after that's accepted they'll be coming after the rest of us.
So absolutely no warrantless arrests for any reason. whatsoever?
Nice strawman. Where did you get the overalls?
It's not a strawman when it directly addresses something you said, guy.
Learn what "strawman" means, you stupid drunk.
Remind me what he was arrested for, again? What law did he break?
He isn't charged with a crime, dipshit, his Visa is revoked and he's being deported
Unless the cops actually catch people in the act of committing a crime, no warrantless arrests. Not a hard idea to comprehend. Without a warrant they shouldn't even have approached the guy.
The vast majority of arrests are without warrants dumdum.
Unless the police catch you in the act of committing a crime they need an arrest warrant. Most arrests are without warrants because of the large number of arrests for drug crimes when the find the drugs on the person.
Don't mistake him for someone who argues in good faith.
What did I say that was incorrect buddy?
A statement can be correct, yet still stupid and irrelevant.
He’s an illegal. He was in the act of committing a crime for every moment since he crossed the border.
Goddamn Tony, this is topic, even for you. And you are incredibly stupid.
Get your facts straight. He was a green card holder, aka a permanent legal resident.
He wasn't arrested for a crime was he Molly.
Also nice non sequitur to basically say I was right but other reasons.
"He wasn't arrested for a crime"
That makes it worse, not better.
Jesse finds it abhorrent when government goons in Iran disappear people off the street for breaking Sharia Law.
But when our government disappears people off the street for suspicion of being illegal and then throws them on a plane without due process, he cheers.
Thanks Maddow!
Who has disappeared?
When a customs agent holds and deports someone at customs, are they disappeared?
You and Molly rely on ignorance. Fucking sad.
No it doesn't. He violated his visa. Due process was followed.
Next retarded argument?
How did he violate his visa?
Violation of civil rights on campus. Blocking access to buildings from other students. Holding custodial staff illegally.
They filmed themselves doing all of this.
Some people have, but there's no evidence so far that Khalil engaged in any such illegal actions. This is just criminalizing opinions.
Have you ever read the laws regarding visas?
Rubio has stated how. Bondi has stated how.
Is your whole persona here just being fucking ignorant?
I've posted the ways he has violated them a half dozen times. You've responded to them. How do you remain ignorant?
Are you a qb sock?
And their statements are factually incorrect, as are yours. Having officially disapproved opinions isn't a visa violation. As a legal resident he has exactly the same rights as anyone else. Why are you determined to defend lawlessness?
Attempts to use taxpayer money to pay off student loans, pressuring media companies to sensor WrongThink, forcing federal workers to take an experimental vaccine, forcing women to play men in collegiate sports...
I wonder what rights of AMERICAN CITIZENS would have been trampled by 4 years of Harris?
Okay but you think that the way you think is common. It isn't. The actual warrantless arrests ALL FOR IT.. the deportations...CAN'T
HAPPEN FAST ENOUFH .Due process , there won't be any if you get your way ...20 million illegals will ensure that victims of murder theft rape drug abuse trafficking will have to sit around and die while we figure out the correct way to deal with a wife-beating MS-13 human trafficke. I only wish they would deport YOU
Wow, bullshit bingo is fun! You're close to a cover all!
The Trump administration's lawless behavior threatens to undermine their alleged goals. If they have actual evidence that someone is a criminal alien, show it to a judge and getting a removal order should be a slam dunk. It was never this hard for previous administrations to play by the rules, but Trump is too dumb and lazy.
Does "Pro-Palestinian" speech cover the aiding and abetting of organizations that trespass on school property and harass and intimidate other students who do not share their views?
What Khalil was deported over was a bit more than "speech".
Should pro-lifers who block access to abortion clinics be deported to foreign prisons? Or is that different.
If they are here on a visa and openly advocate for murdering abortion doctors, then yes, arrest them and revoke their visa
The Supreme Court rejected, on the merits, a First Amendment challenge to a deportation for past membership in the Communist Party. See Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580 (1952)
1. The Alien Registration Act of 1940, so far as it authorizes the deportation of a legally resident alien because of membership in the Communist Party, even though such membership terminated before enactment of the Act, was within the power of Congress under the Federal Constitution. Pp. 342 U. S. 581-596.
There is something different between past membership and current advocacy and crimes in support of.
I mean you and Jeff defend them getting 5 years in prison.
As usual you have no example just you ugly heart vomiting fictions that you picture to yourself to stoke more hate.
Your argument, at root, is that criminals should be denied constitutional protections because they're criminals - which we know because the government said so.
Khalil will get the same due process Peter Harisiades got back in the early 1950's.
No,my argument that what these people were engaged in was not merely speech. You do not have a right to protest in a fashion that violates the rights of others, and therefore cannot hide behind freedom of speech.
Now do J6.
It’s ok to shoot people in the face for trespassing on public property.
Well, smashing through doors and windows and trying to breach a defended position is a bit more than that, don’t you think?
You pretend it was the equivalent of someone getting shot for driving to the wrong address. It wasn’t. There was a riot going on with smashed entrances, overturned barriers, and people yelling about hanging the Vice President.
So, vandalism should be punished by death.
Hey, let's play with your rules.
My side has a lot more guns....
Yet right above he demands different rules for BLM that had 27 deaths associated with the riots and 2B in damages.
Nelson is fucking retarded.
So you're saying cops should have just shot him and you'd cheer?
He should face 20 years in jail and you'd cheer?
Shot him for what, exactly? He didn’t assault anyone. He didn’t hurt anyone. He didn’t break any laws. He just said loathsome things while surrounded by other people saying loathsome things. The analogy would be the khaki-wearing Neo-Nazis in Charlotte carrying torches and chanting “Jews will not replace us!”. Truly awful people saying truly awful things in front of people who were deeply hurt and frightened by what was happening … but it was completely legal and an exercise of free speech.
The point of free speech is to protect awful people’s right to say awful things in front of the people they want to be cruel to. It protects Patriot Front in exactly the same way it protects pro-Palestinian groups who cheer the death of Jews. Equally loathsome people, equally loathsome messages, equally cruel intent, equally protected speech.
Babbit assaulted zero people.
God you're retarded Nelson.
She was literally in the middle of a group trying to breach a defended position. That will get you shot every day and twice on Sunday. And you would deserve it.
She assaulted nobody dumbass.
Stop justifying murder because you're a fascist dem fuck.
Hey Sarc, what due process did Ashley Babbitt get?
Great point. That means illegals should get none. Yup. Sure does. Impeccable reasoning. You're so smart.
Oh, I get it; you think only illegals deserve due process, not American citizens.
Trying to breach a position protected by armed guards got that idiot shot. She caused her own death. When trying to storm a position defended by people with guns, expect to get shot.
I wish the defenders had been less restrained and taken out a dozen or so. The world would be a better place if they had.
But unlike the violent rioters, the defenders were decent people who chose the less aggressive approach. Which makes them much better people than the J6 terrorists.
If I were as dishonest as you, I would ask why you were defending Stuart Rhodes or the pedophiles that have been arrested after their pardon. Because the roster of awful people who were part of the J6 rioters is long and deep.
Which laws or standard process are you citing retard?
BLM did this far more often, how many were shot? Portland tried to do this at a federal office for weeks. How many were shot?
You're a retard Nelson. Day in and day out you prove it.
What laws am I citing for saying a person assaulting a defended position inside a building that was smashed into by an angry mob is fair game to get shot? Seriously?
When you are part of a group actively assaulting a law enforcement officer, you think getting shot isn’t justified? That’s a weird thing to believe.
As far as BLM, or the rioters in Portland, or the rioters in Seattle, the ones participating in violence should have been prosecuted. The ones trespassing should have been prosecuted. The ones who burned things should have been prosecuted.
This is the difference between you and me. I care HOW something is accomplished. If it’s done with violence and destruction, those who participated should go to jail. I don’t give a shit why they say they did it. The ends never justify the means.
That’s why I differentiate between the idiots who burned and occupied portions of a city (criminals) and those who marched peacefully (non-criminals).
You separate those who you agree with (innocent, persecuted victims) and those go you disagree with (violent criminals who don’t deserve due process). There is no substance to your support, just pure bias.
You’re a fringe creature who has no principles. You don’t believe in equal protection. You don’t believe in the rule of law. You don’t believe in governing for all Americans. You believe in preferential treatment for your allies and denial of rights for your “enemies”. You believe that equal treatment is bad and adhering to ideals is weakness.
You are a cancer to our country. But you’re a citizen and, as far as I know, have broken no laws. So we have to just endure you and your fellow rageaholics. Anger can only get you so far and it ends up destroying those who use it far more than those who are the target of it.
So rage on. History will continue to move away from your beliefs and towards a better world. America needs people like Trump and his minions periodically to remember what we believe and why it’s important. By the time he leaves office, I believe Americans’ faith in the Constitution and the rights it describes will be stronger for having survived such a threat.
I believe in Americans. I believe in their basic decency. I believe in their commitment to our ideals. We are a great nation, but we sometimes make mistakes. One of the things that makes us great is we face those mistakes and say, “Wow, we really fucked that up. Let’s not do that again.”. It’s why we will continue to be great long after I am gone.
She wasn't assaulting an officer. Lie number 1.
You now claim those Portland protestors trying to burn down a federal building WITH PEOPLE INSIDE should be prosecuted, not shot. Yet you keep defending killing babbit.
The difference between you and me is youre a fucking liberal dumbass who will justify government abuses against their enemies up to murder.
That's the difference Nelson. You're the piece of shit here.
You will rationalize abuses against your enemies. Full stop.
Even in your rationalization here you demand different standards. Death on j6, prosecutions for Portland.
I honestly just think you're too retarded to realize it.
You're the authoritarian. You're the fucking cancer. You're the piece of shit.
Let’s talk Due Process. Babbitt was deprived of her life without any Due Process.
There is an exigent circumstances exception. But about the only possible exigent circumstances as that the protesters was threatening Speaker Pelosi’s private office.
There were two or three armed agents on her side of that door that didn’t feel threatened enough by “the mob” to start opening fire. Funny that.
But for the sake of argument, let’s say he was totally justified in using deadly force, firing blindly into a corridor with other guards/agents and unarmed people is beyond fucking stupid and NOT justified.
No. Your argument is that the regime hath said it.
Wrong place.
He is being deported for violating his visa. It doesn't require a crime retard.
Weeks and weeks of explaining this, but they keep lying. They will never give up the con.
It’s time to get rid of them. We can’t have a country with filth like Sarc and MAPedo Jeffy in it.
Criminal NON-CITIZENS.
Why do you criminally retarded people always conveniently dismiss that part?
"Your argument, at root, is that criminals should be denied constitutional protections because they're criminals - which we know because the government said so."
Your "augment", shit stain is that all guests should be treated as family member because YOU say so.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
I have yet to meet any rule, law or regulation that is completely voluntary (government or not). As such, yes criminals get less protections than citizens.
What does “voluntary” have to do with equal protection under the law?
You have shown a complete inability to actually know what the law actually is.
No, that is actually an argument against YOU !!!!
If you are not a citizen you are here at our indulgence and nothing more. Notice you exempt illegal alien from criminal, you silly unself-aware nominalist
We are the government by the way Government of the people , for the people, by the people.
Maybe you are one of those illegals who don't know our founding principles and don't give a sht. OYE COMO VA
If there's any evidence Khalil was involved in any such illegal behavior, I haven't seen it.
*scribbles "Warrant" on a postcard*
There, see? Now everything is legit. Get him out of here.
Yeah, but did any of their followers unfollow them on X or unfriend them on Facebook? You can't deport someone if they're still officially friends with natives on Facebook!
You do think you are clever. That makes ONE who thinks you are clever.
Clever and attractive.
Wow, judging by some of your other posts, I'd expect you and AT to be bestest buds. Although I'll agree they're much less clever than they seem to think.
There's so many people simping for il;legal aliens.
And I figured out why people are simping for illegals.
Many of these simpers point out that North America was once inhabited by Native Americans, and white people cant complain about illegal aliens since their ancestors were the invaders and settled there without the native americans' permission.
But why then do these SAME PEOPLE simp for Third world miogrants going to Europe. Don't Europeans have the right to use lethal force to drive away these invaders?
So their reason for simping for illegal aliens must be something else.
It is this.
These people believe that there are oppressor groups and oppressed groups.
They view all white people as oppressors and all collectively and indivisually responsible for the oppression of oppressed groups.
And they feel that oppressed people get to hurt their oppressors.
This is why they simp for the illegal alien.
And excuse their crimes against people, especially white people.
I mean, both Rachel Morin and Laken Riley were killed because illegals wanted to rape their pussies!
This is what they support.
they consider white people as oppressors and excuse crimes committed against them.
Yes. It's Marxism.
Same thing that makes them take the side of literal terrorists over Americans.
How is it Marxist? Isnt it an economic policy?
https://marxist.com/why-marxists-oppose-immigration-controls.htm
Paleoconservatives paint anyone who isn’t isolationist, protectionist, and socially conservative as a Marxist. Don’t try to understand, Jesse is just one of the idiots who have broadened the term beyond any sensible limit.
I’m an ardent capitalist, but they call me a Marxist regularly.
You're a Marxist shrike lol. You believe in a globalist controlled economy.
Yes, the ardent supporter of capitalism, free trade, and small government is a Marxist. Could you prove my point any better? Jeez.
You don't support free trade. You're literally supporting the current globalist system of manage trade that includes tariffs, caps, regulations, etc.
How dumb are you shrike?
Minimum wage: for or against?
Maximum work week: for or against?
Child labor: for or against?
Elimination of public hospitals, and privatization of the industry: for or against?
Marxism isn't just economic in nature. It's social/political as well.
And to answer your question, this right here: "And they feel that oppressed people get to hurt their oppressors."
That's called Critical Theory. It comes straight out of the Frankfurt School whose singular goal was the breaking of the class system and power structures which aimed at collapsing them and replacing them social equity.
This singular (and childish) categorization of everyone into a binary category of Oppressor or Oppressed, and then automatically siding with the latter (no matter how insane, like with actual terrorists) while rebelling against the former (even when they're factually, logically, rationally, morally, and otherwise objectively correct), is an attempt at destroying class structures and its inherent inequalities. Which is the goal of Marxism in a nutshell.
Any other questions?
Marxism in not an economic policy it is a philosophy of history. I know, I know , you didn't have time to like you know actually read the book.
So let's just check one source
In fact Marxism itself is not at all an economic theory. It is rather a statement, that capitalism is exploiting the normal people (workers) and ...blan blah blah
“ Same thing that makes them take the side …”
Proving you don’t understand what principles are. It isn’t taking the side of the people who are accused (terrorist/non-terrorist, father/not-father, citizen/not-citizen, etc.).
It’s taking the side of American values and the Constitution against those who think they should be reserved for those who are “worthy” (defined by those in power).
You are on the wrong side if you think American values and the Constitution should be abandoned if activists can throw enough mud on someone.
You're justifying shooting an unarmed woman and arresting non violent protestors all over this thread shrike.
No, I’m justifying shooting a woman who was trying to breach a defended position and arresting people who broke the law all over this thread. Your “my guys are innocent, their guys are guilty” worldview is the barrier between what you hear and what is said.
Ashli Babbitt was in a mob assaulting a defended position. That will get you shot. And it did.
No matter how many times you try to rationalize it you're supporting shooting an unarmed woman lol.
Nelson, you are not related to her, you have no legal stake, you have only second-hand facts. You are the fascist you think you are talking to. How brave you are ...this will get you shot and it did..,. aren't you the wonderful Clint Eastwood figure.
We stand for due process and civil rights for all. Why don't you? How would you like it if you were arrested without a warrant and deported?
If I snuck across the Mexican border and was caught by their police without a valid visa or passport, getting back the US would be much better than being locked away in some Mexican prison somewhere, but I'd be an idiot to not expect either of those results.
The GOP used to understand that rights are something to be protected by government. Now they're just like leftists who believe that government is the source of our rights.
Yet you advocate for foreigners to violate the rights of citizens, even defending foreigners who commit crimes, utilize welfare, etc.
My college roommate violated the terms of his student visa while doing a year of study abroad in Spain. He was arrested without warrant, not given any sort of hearing, driven in a van to the border of Portugal, and they literally threw his ass out.
That is the normal 'due process' around the world.
The US is the only country in the world with free speech. By your reasoning that's a bad thing.
That’s not what his reasoning suggests at all.
What are you talking about? I did not say anything of the sort. I didn't even present reasoning.
Your argument is that because it's standard practice in other countries, that's what the US should do too. I merely substituted no free speech for deportation without due process. Same reasoning.
Ohhhhh, sorry. I get it. You were emoting, not reasoning. My bad.
Point out the emoting in my comment for the rest of us, please.
It seems like what you are doing is to substitute what has been stated for your own imaginary reasons, and then attack that instead. There's a term for that. (Hint: It still isn't Ad-Hom)
According to you "The rest of the world deports people without due process, so that's what we should do."
I'm just extending your reasoning to other things.
"The rest of the world jails people for speech, so that's what we should do."
"The rest of the world has free healthcare, so that's what we should do."
"The rest of the world outlaws firearm ownership, so that's what se should do."
If you don't like those arguments and see them as stupid and wrong, then maybe your argument is stupid and wrong. Ever think of that?
"Ever think of that?" They don't.
Are you two this retarded?
Where did the commentor say "so that is what we should do"? The commentor merely said what most other Western nations do.
Why are you consistently so retarded?
Amazing how retarded sarc and Molly are. Just amazing.
They will say anything to justify their leftist narratives.
How is "Civil rights for all" a narrative?
He uses "narrative" to describe things he hates. So he's saying he hates the concept of civil rights for all. He supports civil rights for people he likes, but not for people he hates. Civil rights for insurrectionists? Of course. Civil rights for people accused of being without papers? Hell no.
You're literally projecting again.
If you were ever sober enough to read the rules, regulations, and rights of those on visas, you'd maybe be able to understand.
You put the Civil Rights of immigrants over the citizens you hate. It is fucking weird. But standard for a leftist.
How is it not, fuck-face?
Because you don’t actually believe in civil rights or due process for all?
Edit: and you ignore that they received due process under the current immigration laws and system.
A) you don't agree with it. Just last week you said fuck the j6ers when I asked about the violations against them.
B) you don't understand what civil rights are.
What about the civil rights of Rachel Morin and Laken Riley?
There's too much obsession with rights, even when they come at the cost of our safety!
That’s not emoting…
"If other countries do terrible things, that means the US has to emulate them"
"It is vital that we are held to a standard that nobody has been held to in human history and is not remotely needed by our laws"
Oh, fuck off, you fat, lying piece of shit. You can’t argue the facts, so you start liking up platitudes.
“ That is the normal 'due process' around the world.”
OK, so you have an example of why America is better than other places, even other democracies. Was that the point you were trying to make?
I agree that we are the best country in the world.
You're the one demanding we import the Third World.
Import people from shitholes, you become a shithole.
Nelson loves that.
You democrats love the government. Not the country.
No, you don’t.
It's a moot question to ask him, assuming he's not an illegal.
This is an issue that only affects illegal aliens, and only because of their intentional illegal alienage. It was 100% preventable.
It's kinda like monkeypox. You're not going to make anyone empathize with a monkeypoxer by saying, "How would you like it?" Obviously the theoretical answer is they wouldn't - but it's a disingenuous question because you're asking it of someone who would never get it. Monkeypox only affects one group of people, and it is 100% preventable.
And illegal getting arrested/deported is kinda like a LGBT Pedo getting monkeypox. Nobody feels sorry for them. They were literally asking for it by intentionally doing something VERY risky they should have never been doing in the first place.
Illegals just want to hurt Americans.
And we can see what migrants are REALLY after.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35250903
The only reasons people would simp for illegals is that they feel their victims (especially girls) deserved it.
No, Democrats just want to hurt Americans. Illegals are just the tool they use.
You have to remember that Democrats operate from the deeply ingrained mentality of Masters and Slaves. They hate that slavery was abolished, and they've been pissy about it ever since. Embracing the border jumping criminals serves multiple purposes for them. 1) it creates a slave (or at least near-slave) class of people in America; 2) it destabilizes the social/political framework that the Founders built and later presidents (esp. Lincoln) refined that made the individual sovereign and "necessitates" the Democrat's assertion and imposition of power and dominance in order to establish control; 3) it undermines America's economic power forcing more Americans to become dependent on government/Democrat handouts. And once you're dependent on them, the Master/Slave relationship is re-established.
This has been the singular goal of the Democrats since "Democrats" became a thing (nor has their overt racism). It has not changed ONCE over the decades.
This is the same reason they're all worked about tariffs. Again, they love slavery. And that's why they want to pander and simp to any slave-utilizing nation. They want Americans addicted to cheap slave-made goods available on demand, because that'll soften them up for a return to slavery here in America.
It takes some real thought to be this stupid.
Wow, going full retard here. (Remember kids, never go full retard!) The "one group" affected by monkeypox is "people exposed to monkeypox". Trying to claim it's strictly a gay thing is utter bullshit and equating queer people with pedophiles if really tired bullshit. Claiming a lawless government only affects illegals is also utter bullshit. We've seen clear evidence that it doesn't. But hey, keep right on lying if it lets you pwn teh libz.
How many straight people have been infected with monkeypox?
And you can't count that poor abused dog in France.
Who is 'we' ... Suppose you are arrested with a warrant and deported for a heinous crime and get back in the country because Molly don't like no lack of due process. There are enough rapists, murderers, terrorists, MS-13 and Tren de Aragua to assure me that
1) you have no kids
2) you have money
3) You live in al good neighborhood
No one is excusing actual crimes. We're "simping" for people abused by a lawless government, at least some of whom are legal residents or actual citizens.
do a piece on Cloward-Piven
I don't really care Margaret.
Poor Little Emma. Probably has wet herself over this whole thing. It’s just terrible that the Hamas organizer is being legally sent back to his shit hole country.
He's not a "Hamas organizer". But when you're defending the indefensible I guess lies are all you got.
I know probably a dozen people who've been arrested and maybe a handful who've had warrants issued against them. I don't know anyone who is a member of both groups.
I know people who are almost certainly here illegally who don't get warrants and don't get arrests because it's not the local PD's job to go around investigating people for being here illegally. It's only when they get arrested otherwise that it's discovered that they're illegal and/or have a warrant out for their arrest.
Seriously, this is something I would expect my 11 yr. old to understand from a 6th Grade social studies class. Emma "Hur dur" Camp strikes again!
I believe the problem is arresting someone who has neither broken the law, nor has a warrant out for them.
Are you comfortable with someone who has done nothing illegal being detained because the government doesn’t like them? I know I’m not.
If you're not a citizen and you violated the terms of your visa --- this gets filed under tough shit.
When you agree to a visa, if you violate it, your advanced notice before you did anything was far more than enough due process.
Except expressing officially disapproved opinions isn't a visa violation. If there's any evidence linking the guy with violent or otherwise illegal actions I haven't seen it.
You're also not comfortable with even figuring out what the laws are or the visa regulations.
You're not intelligent shrike.
And this doesn't even get into the whole shitstorm about "What if we concoct a story about how an ex-President didn't break a law but an administrative rule and violate his civil rights on the obviously false premise that he's committed a crime that we can't name as predicate to the rule we're enforcing?"
This country arrests no-shit, nth generation American citizens, immigrants, and foreign nationals for posting shit on social media all the time. It entraps it's own citizens. The idea that tears should be shed and mountains of injustice moved to accommodate someone who, by their own admission was deliberately trying to disrupt and extort or subvert the existing peace? Fuck that noise.
What the hell are you saying . Every vile abominable sht criminal is first arrested only on suspicaion !!! I don't know if they have done something illegal until I detain them. IF they are illegal aliens they are already in violation. I hope reality doesn't come up and give you the fiery dragon breath of reality to cure your PollyAnna Syndrome
I think what I really want to hear about, at this point, is if the wife plans on following her husband to a country where women are property and his fellow Hamas travelers are in power.
I suspect the answer is 'no' on that one. She's more than happy to endorse terrorists and religious fundamentalists oversea's, but probably less happy to live among them.
Mahmoud Khalil is a pro-Hamas cheerleading piece of shit who has the privilege to be in the US on a student visa.
Advocating violence against anyone is not free speech, and only a leftist nut case would disagree.
His deportation is welcomed by all sane people just like the deportation of any MS-13 gang member would be welcomed by all the sane.
“ Mahmoud Khalil is a pro-Hamas cheerleading piece of shit who has the privilege to be in the US on a student visa.”
Agreed.
“ Advocating violence against anyone is not free speech, and only a leftist nut case would disagree.”
Maybe, maybe not. I believe that being supportive of groups that are violent is OK, Constitutionally speaking, which is why support for the KKK isn’t illegal.
And, of course, whether or not he personally threatened violence (which is what you can’t do) against anyone is something that would need to be proved at a hearing of some sort. Taking the word of the government at face value is always a very bad idea.
I believe that saying you love/support/encourage violent groups is still protected. Saying, “those boogaloo boys have the right idea” is protected. Saying, “I want to start a race war” is protected. Saying, “I’m going to kill you, black people” is not protected.
Lawyers, is that the gist of it?
“ His deportation is welcomed by all sane people just like the deportation of any MS-13 gang member would be welcomed by all the sane.”
I agree, after they have due process. He isn’t a good person and he believes and supports some vile things. But if you believe whatever the government says without making them prove it, you don’t believe in American values or the Constitution. It’s that simple.
You seem to be one of those people who thinks that if someone supports due process, they support the person being denied it. That’s like saying that if someone supports the right to a legal defense against criminal charges, they support the criminal. It’s bad faith at best, anti-American at worst.
If the government says something, they need to be able to prove it. And when a court hands down a ruling, the government has to abide by it. It’s at the core of how the American justice system works.
You are justifying lack of due process just above retard.
Not even a little bit. I have never justified the lack of due process. Your “example” of someone who was “detained without charges” was pretty easily and quickly shown to be a narrative that was completely unconnected to reality.
The J6 folks all got due process. You just don’t like the results. There’s a difference between the two.
But , Nelson, assuming you have normal intelligence, you should have seen the problem of due process for Biden's 20 million illegals. Now you are advocating for pushing Americans out of rights to justice so you can have a trial date for a small nation of illegals
Utterly agree
Being pro-Palestinian isn't the same thing as being pro-Hamas. Hell, most Palestinians aren't pro-Hamas and only tolerate them because they're the ones with the guns. Except in very limited circumstances, yes advocating violence is still free speech. Blame the "leftist nut cases" called the Supreme Court. And if you have actual evidence that someone is a criminal gang member, fine, come down on them like a ton of bricks. But baseless accusations don't cut it.
Trying to understand why I should fucking care about this guy.
I've got sympathy for simple fruit pickers and barbacks and short order cooks just making a living here under the table.
But this guy? Sorry, I really don't care Margaret
I've got sympathy for simple fruit pickers and barbacks and short order cooks just making a living here under the table.
Yeah. I love how the repeated outcry for this guy simultaneously reveals and kneecaps their own "They're all just here to mow our lawns, roof our houses, open up taco/falafel/schwarma fusion cuisine trucks, assimilate to our culture, and support our economy!" dishonesty.
Not that leveraging un(der)paid labor as government/social policy was that great a talking point to begin with but, turns out, it's not even about that.
Educating the terrorists of tomorrow at American Ivy league schools?
Sounds about right, if we're honest. So many of these wack job terrorist leaders somehow went to prestigious schools in both the U.S. and U.K. which says a lot about those places.
Fuck, the NYT tried to make one feel bad that a Jamaican who was here illegally AND had a fucking 15-year sentence for kidnapping got deported.
"He was in the USA for 21 years" --- and 15 of those were in prison due to kidnapping and 4 of those were under Biden who did not deport much of anybody.
Arrests in the middle of a crime do not require warrants. Never have.
What crime was he in the middle of? That would be the charges he was arrested on which were … what again?
Ask the government - they arrested him.
So not only should we just trust the government to actually have a reason, we should blindly trust them and not even need to know what that reason is?
Are you always so credulous of the government’s honesty?
Are you insane or just stupid.
You don't need a warrant to arrest someone in the middle of a crime. Most arrest are not done with a warrant. So freaking out that this guy didn't have a warrant is weird because that is normally how arrests are done.
I said nothing about what crime he was committing, nothing about trusting the government. Nothing.
That is all in your head.
Call me crazy, but I'm not eager to accept the word of proven liars. If there's any evidence linking the guy to violent or otherwise illegal behavior, present it. If there isn't, quit breaking the law and cut him loose.
Also, if this is what the administration is doing all the time - running roughshod over people's rights - then why are the only examples you can find to whine about are of the worst sort of people.
Every single poster boy you've held up turned out to actually be an active gang member, including the makeup artist and the guy with the 'autism awareness' tattoo.
“ then why are the only examples you can find to whine about are of the worst sort of people.”
Because it’s often the awful people who get arrested and face due process. That isn’t a reason to deny them due process. Exactly the opposite.
Do you really not understand the foundation of our concept of justice? “Innocent until proven guilty”? Or “all equal under the law”? Or, to steal a phrase if you want to trust the government in all things, “trust but verify”?
How good or bad someone is is irrelevant to whether or not they deserve due process. EVERYONE deserves due process.
You're under the mistaken impression that decades of trials are due process.
It is not. Especially not for non-citizens.
Do you really not understand the foundation of our concept of justice?
Do you really not understand why they're called "illegal aliens?"
Because we've already proven guilty the only thing that matters. We've already provided for equality under the law. We've already verified.
There are no questions whether they are citizens, there are no questions whether they entered the country illegally or stayed on expired visas. We're suffering no illusions or uncertainties about their citizenship. This is not a thing that requires a trial to prove.
Round 'em up, ship 'em out. And even if "due process" were a consideration - and it's not - we immediately see just how little it means in these cases. That's my favorite part about Killmore Alfredo Tequila and the mainstream media narrativist's obsession with him. He provided a crystal clear example of just how impossible it was to "deprive" this clown of any "rights" you think he had. And by going to bat for him the Courts showed how utterly toothless they are on the subject.
All we gotta do is get them out. After that, it's game over. Where's my meme... hold on... I just had it...
All we gotta do is get them out and: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkJqKOb0ZhY
All your blustering, all your posturing, all your oh-so-righteous facade of giving a rip about the Constitution - it's all out the window.
And you know it.
It's why this method is pissing the clown world lefties off so much. Because it's the cold slap in the face that there is no case to make OR be made for border jumping criminal aliens. They have NO rights.
None.
Except in many cases it not only has not been proven, it's been actively disproven. Garcia is a legal resident, not charged or accused of any crime, just for one example. But when defending the indefensible, lies are all you got.
Garcia is a legal resident
Wrong.
"Legal Protection" does not mean "Legal Resident." We could deport him at any time. Arguably not to El Salvador, but... oopsie daisies - nothing that can be done about it now.
They all received due process. Not a single one of them was just spirited away in the dark of night. They literally appeared before immigration judges, which is the process.
What do you think they need to prove or establish with a more involved process? They are either here illegally or not. Do you think they have some evidence to prove they are here legally? And that somehow this is being held back for a jury of 12 peers or something?
Today, in the early hours of the morning, the New Orleans ICE Field Office deported at least two families, including two mothers and their minor children – three of whom are U.S. citizen children aged 2, 4, and 7.
-snip-
ICE detained the first family on Tuesday, April 22, and the second family on Thursday, April 24. In both cases, 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.
As a result, 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.
Both families have possible immigration relief, but because ICE denied them access to their attorneys, legal counsel was unable to assist and advise them in time. With one family, government attorneys had assured legal counsel that a legal call would be arranged within 24-48 hours, as well as a call with a family member. Instead, just after close of business and after courts closed for the day, ICE suddenly reversed course and informed counsel that the family would be deported at 6am the next morning–before the court reopened.
https://nipnlg.org/news/press-releases/ice-deports-3-us-citizen-children-held-incommunicado-prior-deportation
------------------------------------
This is literally "spirited away in the dark of night" with no due process.
From your link:
"...despite ICE being notified in advance of the child’s urgent medical needs..."
Seems they had notice that something wasn't as your propaganda source claims. Nope, not buying the 'just so' story.
How long have they been here? What activities have they been involved in? Have they been to court over some issues?
You expect us to believe ICE picked two families at random and did what your source claims, fill out the rest of the story. Until then, fuck off.
the New Orleans ICE Field Office deported at least two families
BOOM! Keep posting those wins LB! America loves to hear 'em!
including two mothers and their minor children – three of whom are U.S. citizen children aged 2, 4, and 7.
I have zero doubt whatsoever that the children were afforded the opportunity to stay, and that THEIR MOTHERS made the choice to willingly deport them with her.
refusing or failing to respond to multiple attempts by attorneys and family members to contact them.
Yea, that hold music whenever you call up anything government. Oof. You know what I'm talking about. Gosh, it's just so too darned gosh golly bad that government is so... inefficient by nature, isn't it.
Probably also frustrating is there isn't a "Para el espanol, presione ocho" option anymore. LOL.
Seriously Lib, keep posting those Dubs. LOVE IT.
This is a blatant lie. We've provably had people removed with zero hearing or due process, including legal residents.
No, they did not all appear before a judge. This is a lie, but what else do you have when you're defending the indefensible? We know for a fact that they're grabbed at least one legal resident. With their rushed and shoddy process, there's no way of saying for sure that they have grabbed more, possibly even citizens.
There's precisely zero evidence that the "makeup artist" is or ever was a gang member. The unsupported word of one guy that even the cops thought was lying is not evidence, nor are pictures of alleged tattoos that look like they were shopped by a 5yo.
Even if they were going after the "worst of people", there are still rules to follow. And sending anyone to foreign torture prisons, even real and proven criminals, is a crime against humanity.
I don't mind seeing green card holders stripped of their green cards if there are legal and constitutional grounds to do so. Unlike the authoritarian cultists who infest this site like cockroaches and termites, however, I don't merely take the regime's word for it that these grounds exist in all cases,
"I don't mind seeing green card holders stripped of their green cards if there are legal and constitutional grounds to do so. Unlike the authoritarian cultists who infest this site like cockroaches and termites, however, I don't merely take the regime's word for it that these grounds exist in all cases,"
Unlike the claims of TDS cultists who infest this site, they are stripped of the green cards for exactly those reasons.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
You talk about people being authoritarian - but you were fine with Obama's deportations and kids in cages. You were fine with Biden flouting the law and importing millions of illegals; or are you going to say it's ok because the President unilaterally authorized them to be here?
You were also fine with Biden telling the courts to go fuck themselves regarding student loans.
You call others Nazi while supporting Nazis.
I was not fine with most of it, but I didn't regard it as part of a threatening patten of authoritarianism.
You call others Nazi while supporting Nazis.
You're a fucking liar.
You are a lying pile of steaming lefty shit.
And you're a sheep who thinks mindlessly bleating "Left! Baa! Left!" is an actual argument.
Assuming facts not in evidence, and lying through your teeth for good measure. Obama's deportations got a bit shady, with many pressured or tricked into waiving their right to a hearing, but those who didn't waive got a hearing and Obama never claimed he could deny them one.
The claim that Biden "imported millions of illegals" is utter bullshit, as is the claim that he ignored the courts.
Speaking for myself, I only call people Nazis when they insist on acting like Nazis, and opposing Trump's bad behavior doesn't mean supporting bad behavior by others. Unlike many of the commenters, I'm an actual libertarian, not a good TEAM player.
"My college roommate violated the terms of his student visa while doing a year of study abroad in Spain. He was arrested without warrant, not given any sort of hearing, driven in a van to the border of Portugal, and they literally threw his ass out.
That is the normal 'due process' around the world."
The Founders presumed to be setting standards for the world, and we can thank them for that goal. But that desire was far beyond their ability, and the best they could do was limit the government's actions to those directly under the US government's 'control'; the citizens of the US.
We (the citizens of the US) do not presume to keep our government from 'exporting' those guests whom we find obnoxious and that is limit is purposely vague to keep from tying up the courts for years dealing with pettifoggery from lefty shit stains.
Fuck off and die.
You have contributed nothing here and you are not welcome.
Emma Goldman was arrested without a warrant, jailed and deported. In 1919 the US deported 249 aliens en masse.
Bad behavior a century ago doesn't justify bad behavior today.
"Nebulous" = putting up a "we're back" post on a dormant Students for Palestine X account minutes into the 10/7 attacks, before the news had broken.