Smoove shared that (without a x.com link, he wins) last night.
https://www.octopusoverlords.com/forum/ ... 9#p3080559
Moderators: $iljanus, LawBeefaroni
Smoove shared that (without a x.com link, he wins) last night.
A lawsuit filed by more than a dozen Democratic state attorneys general Tuesday is challenging President Donald Trump’s bid to end birthright citizenship, a major constitutional challenge to one of the White House’s signature policies.
The lawsuit alleges that a Trump executive order signed Monday violates the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which gives a constitutional right of citizenship to all children born in the United States.
“Despite a President’s broad powers to set immigration policy, however, the Citizenship Stripping Order falls far outside the legal bounds of the President’s authority,” the lawsuit says.
The case could end up becoming the first major Supreme Court showdown for Trump’s second-term agenda. The states filed in a Massachusetts federal court, which means any appeal of a ruling from that court will come up through the First US Circuit Court of Appeals, where all the judges are Democratic appointees.
The Supreme Court has upheld birthright citizenship in the past and there is also a federal law passed by Congress, predating the 14th Amendment’s 1868 ratification, establishing that children born on US soil are entitled to citizenship.
“The president’s entitled to put forth a policy agenda that he sees fit,” New Jersey Democratic Attorney General Matthew Platkin, who is co-leading the new lawsuit, told CNN.
“When it comes to birthright citizenship – something that’s been part of the fabric of this nation for centuries, that’s been in the Constitution for 157 years since the Civil War, that’s been upheld by the Supreme Court twice – the president cannot, with a stroke of a pen, rewrite the Constitution and upend the rule of law,” he added.
I don't think it's a sacrificial lamb necessarily, because I think they'll try really hard to win it. Part of the strategy, however, is supposedly to "flood the zone" with so many issues that it overwhelms and some slip through.Blackhawk wrote: Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:23 pm It could just be a sacrificial lamb intended to keep attention away from the rest of his actions. By the time people stop screaming about the unconstitutionality, and by the time this goes through the system, hundreds of other 'WTF' orders will have passed by quietly.
Again, he said he was gonna (it's not a surprise) but they're wasting no time.Immigration authorities can now enter schools, healthcare facilities and places of worship to conduct arrests, according to a new policy from the Department of Homeland Security.
"Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America's schools and churches to avoid arrest," a DHS spokesperson said in a statement. "The Trump administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense."
The directive, which covers agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, rescinds guidance from the Biden administration that created "protected areas" that primarily consisted of places where "children gather, disaster or emergency relief sites, and social services establishments."
The Biden-era guideline mandated that immigration enforcement operations shouldn't take place in or near a location that would limit peoples' access to "essential" services or activities.
"The Trump administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense."
If he's allowed that much leeway to ignore the Constitution, there won't be a next liberal President.Kraken wrote: Tue Jan 21, 2025 10:12 pm If SCOTUS says POTUS can overrule amendments he doesn't like, I look forward to the next liberal president canceling the 2nd.
Valid point.Blackhawk wrote: Tue Jan 21, 2025 10:46 pmIf he's allowed that much leeway to ignore the Constitution, there won't be a next liberal President.Kraken wrote: Tue Jan 21, 2025 10:12 pm If SCOTUS says POTUS can overrule amendments he doesn't like, I look forward to the next liberal president canceling the 2nd.
I am looking forward to the OUTRAGE! when the videos appear of those stupid ICE officers raid churches and threaten clergy who resist.
Additionally:The Justice Department is directing its federal prosecutors to investigate any state or local officials who stand in the way of beefed-up enforcement of immigration laws under the Trump administration, according to a memo to the entire workforce obtained by The Associated Press on Wednesday.
The memo, written by acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, also instructs the Justice Department’s civil division to help identify state and local laws and policies that “threaten to impede” the Trump administration’s immigration initiatives and potentially challenge them in court.
Prosecutors shall “take all steps necessary to protect the public and secure the American border by removing illegal aliens from the country and prosecuting illegal aliens for crimes” committed in U.S. jurisdiction, the memo says. It directs prosecutors to investigate for potential criminal charges cases in which state and local officials obstruct or impede federal functions.
“Federal law prohibits state and local actors from resisting, obstructing and otherwise failing to comply with lawful immigration-related commands and requests,” the memo says. “The U.S. Attorney’s Offices and litigating components of the Department of Justice shall investigate incidents involving any such misconduct for potential prosecution.”
Just make sure to assault police officers while trying to overthrow the government or sell drugs on the internet and eventually it'll all work out.The memo also says the department will return to the principle of charging defendants with the most serious crime it can prove, a staple position of Republican-led departments meant to remove a prosecutor’s discretion to charge a lower-level offense.
“The most serious charges are those punishable by death where applicable, and offenses with the most significant mandatory minimum sentences,” Bove wrote.
It is common for Justice Departments to shift enforcement priorities under a new presidential administration in compliance with White House policy ambitions. The memo reflects the constant push-and-pull between Democratic and Republican administrations over how best to commit resources to what officials regard as the most urgent threat of the time.
The edict to charge the most readily provable offense, for instance, is consistent with directives from prior Republican attorneys general including John Ashcroft and Jeff Sessions, while Democratic attorneys general including Eric Holder and Merrick Garland have replaced the policy and instead encouraged prosecutorial discretion.
That's only true when it's an "illegitimate" government. I wouldn't try it with this one unless you're going all-in to win.Smoove_B wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2025 11:15 am Just make sure to assault police officers while trying to overthrow the government ... and eventually it'll all work out.
He's got GLP-1s now.hepcat wrote: Tue Jan 21, 2025 9:42 pm I’ll say what I always say: come on KFC and McDonalds. You’re our only hope!
Like that's gonnna stop him when he's watching the Gorilla Channel and wants a midnight drumstick?LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2025 12:38 pmHe's got GLP-1s now.hepcat wrote: Tue Jan 21, 2025 9:42 pm I’ll say what I always say: come on KFC and McDonalds. You’re our only hope!
Get ready for higher prices at the grocery store, America!gilraen wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2025 12:51 pm Reports coming out that 75% of immigrant farm workers didn't show up for work yesterday in Bakersfield, CA, due to fear of ICE raids.
Section 1. Policy and Purpose. (a) It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes.
(b) To protect Americans, the United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those aliens approved for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests. More importantly, the United States must identify them before their admission or entry into the United States. And the United States must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to our national security.
Threads are still unreadable for people without an account. Just paste they URL here: https://threadreaderapp.com/
Thanks. I no longer click on twitter, nor do I want a tesla, or his solar.Smoove_B wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2025 1:23 pm Link to page for the ban:
Section 1. Policy and Purpose. (a) It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes.
(b) To protect Americans, the United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those aliens approved for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests. More importantly, the United States must identify them before their admission or entry into the United States. And the United States must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to our national security.
Give Trump time - soon enough, he'll start deporting them back to Siberia.IceBear wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2025 2:51 pm The First Nations peoples must be eye rolling so hard at all this. The irony
There were no 'round ups' or any raids reported that I heard about.
U.S. District Judge John Coughenour repeatedly interrupted a Justice Department lawyer during arguments to ask how he could consider the order constitutional. When the attorney, Brett Shumate, said he’d like a chance to explain it in a full briefing, Coughenour told him the hearing was his chance.
...
The case is one of five lawsuits being brought by 22 states and a number of immigrants rights groups across the country. The suits include personal testimonies from attorneys general who are U.S. citizens by birthright, and names pregnant women who are afraid their children won’t become U.S. citizens.
Coughenour, a Ronald Reagan appointee, began the hearing by grilling the administration’s attorneys, saying the order “boggles the mind.”
“This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,” Coughenour told Shumate. Coughenour said he’s been on the bench for more than four decades, and he couldn’t remember seeing another case where the action challenged was so clearly unconstitutional.
I keep reading about raids on social media but nothing is ever verifiable, which sucks. Is that because no one is reporting, or more likely, people are trolling and then others are just going ZOMG! and re-posting. It started locally with alerts (zero verified with local news sources) for Hamtramck (the first majority Muslim city in the US, whose mayor has famously endorsed TFG) and since I've seen them for places all over, not just local.Unagi wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2025 9:16 pmThere were no 'round ups' or any raids reported that I heard about.
an npr report:
https://www.stlpr.org/government-politi ... uiet-trump
That is the correct answer.Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Jan 23, 2025 3:20 pm A federal judge temporarily blocks Trump’s executive order redefining birthright citizenship
U.S. District Judge John Coughenour repeatedly interrupted a Justice Department lawyer during arguments to ask how he could consider the order constitutional. When the attorney, Brett Shumate, said he’d like a chance to explain it in a full briefing, Coughenour told him the hearing was his chance.
...
The case is one of five lawsuits being brought by 22 states and a number of immigrants rights groups across the country. The suits include personal testimonies from attorneys general who are U.S. citizens by birthright, and names pregnant women who are afraid their children won’t become U.S. citizens.
Coughenour, a Ronald Reagan appointee, began the hearing by grilling the administration’s attorneys, saying the order “boggles the mind.”
“This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,” Coughenour told Shumate. Coughenour said he’s been on the bench for more than four decades, and he couldn’t remember seeing another case where the action challenged was so clearly unconstitutional.
An action ordered by a man who, mere hours before, had sworn an oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution."Coughenour said he’s been on the bench for more than four decades, and he couldn’t remember seeing another case where the action challenged was so clearly unconstitutional.
Happened in NJ today:
Newark Mayor Ras Baraka confirmed in a statement that the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement, commonly referred to as ICE, raided a local establishment in the city on Thursday.
Baraka said agents detained undocumented residents as well as citizens, without producing a warrant.
“One of the detainees is a U.S. military veteran who suffered the indignity of having the legitimacy of his military documentation questioned,” Baraka said. “This egregious act is in plain violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees ‘the right of the people be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures….’”
The mayor went on to say Newark will not “stand by idly while people are being unlawfully terrorized.”
His hand wasn't on the bible. I'll bet his fingers were crossed, too.YellowKing wrote: Thu Jan 23, 2025 7:00 pmAn action ordered by a man who, mere hours before, had sworn an oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution."Coughenour said he’s been on the bench for more than four decades, and he couldn’t remember seeing another case where the action challenged was so clearly unconstitutional.