Decimation, Due Process, and Deportations

Democrats are forcing America’s long-standing commitment to due process to become a suicide pact, an idea that cannot survive the illegal alien onslaught.

Since the Enlightenment, the Anglosphere has had a laudable commitment to due process, which means opposing the brutality of group punishment. But what happens when that commitment leads to societal suicide? Our Founders cannot have intended this, especially regarding those people who ignored due process to enter America illegally.

Why does any of this matter today? Because our Constitution is not a suicide pact.

Over the last 4 years, over 10 million illegal aliens invaded the country. Over the previous 30 years, another 20-30 million came. In total, there are approximately 35 million illegal aliens in the United States, and we finally have a president who has decided to take on the Herculean / Sisyphean task of deporting them.

And now that someone is trying to do something about the cancer of illegal immigration, the left is throwing roadblocks in the way seemingly every other day. The rationales are varied, but a fundamental argument is “Due Process.”

Due Process is an important element of American history and jurisprudence, but like the Constitution, it’s not a suicide pact.

Thirty-five million illegal aliens are 10% of the American population. Judges across the country are telling the administration it must exercise Due Process as to each one of them before any of them can be deported.

That is simply not feasible. Between scheduling court dates, conducting court cases, and waiting on the appeals process, there’s literally no way for the American judicial system to handle that number of cases.

Quotes from the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees:

Article 31. - Refugees unlawfully in the country of refuge

1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.
2. The Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The Contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country.

Article 32. - Expulsion

1. The Contracting States shall not expel a refugee lawfully in their territory save on grounds of national security or public order.
2. The expulsion of such a refugee shall be only in pursuance of a decision reached in accordance with due process of law. Except where compelling reasons of national security otherwise require, the refugee shall be allowed to submit evidence to clear himself, and to appeal to and be represented for the purpose before competent authority or a person or persons specially designated by the competent authority.
3. The Contracting States shall allow such a refugee a reasonable period within which to seek legal admission into another country. The Contracting States reserve the right to apply during that period such internal measures as they may deem necessary.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-relating-status-refugees

****

What does Trump have to do to get the US out from under the Refugee Convention?

Send (or hand deliver) the Secretary-General of the United Nations Antonio Guterres a letter!

****

Dear Secretary-General of the United Nations:

I, Donald J. Trump, the President of the United States, on behalf of the United States, do denounce the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, as permitted by Article 44.

Donald J. Trump

****

The Refugee Convention, the invaders’ red carpet, must be removed from the Democratic Party toolbox by invoking Article 44.

We have heard a lot of innuendo about how Due Process works for illegal aliens. Basically, when certain politicians and media people discuss it, they suggest that illegal aliens should get the exact same Due Process when up against the criminal justice system that long time citizens of the United States and naturalized citizens of the United States receive. Most of them know better than that, but try to take advantage of the public’s lack of knowledge of how the laws are structured and enforced. Aliens receive the Due Process that US citizens do in a minority of potential cases, but they do get some Due Process, although the amount of that Due Process gets reduced as different laws come into play, such as the USA PATRIOT Act.

1. When do illegal aliens receive all the Due Process US citizens receive?

Answer: When the illegal alien is charged with a crime for which the alien is arrested and required to appear before a State judge, or a federal judge hearing such cases, the alien has the same due process rights as any citizen of the United States. I’m not talking about Immigration Law violations, but high misdemeanor and/or felony cases (murder, rape, kidnapping, robbery, etc.).

2. Illegal Aliens violate the Immigration statutes in federal law. What Due Process do they receive when answering for being here illegally?

Illegal aliens answering for violating Immigration laws by being here without documented authorization, such as a visa (student, tourist, work, or some special visa), are brought before an Immigration Court presided over by an Immigration Judge. This is not an “Article Three Court”, as in Article Three of the Constitution, but an Administrative Court under the Department of Justice. The judge of such a court is a lawyer working for the Department of Justice. Basically, the Immigration Judge determines if the alien is here illegally, and once that is established deportation of the alien is the typical outcome.

Immigration courts handle cases where individuals face potential removal from the U.S. due to violations of immigration laws. The court’s role is to determine whether an individual is admissible or removable, and to adjudicate applications for relief from removal, such as asylum or a green card.

Here’s a more detailed look at the process as presented by Google AI:

Initial Charges and Notification:
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) charges an individual with violating immigration law and issues a Notice to Appear (NTA), according to ICE. This NTA initiates removal proceedings.

Master Calendar Hearing:
Immigration courts hold Master Calendar Hearings (MCHs) where the judge addresses administrative matters, such as scheduling, amending NTA, and handling preliminary issues.

Individual Calendar Hearing:
After the MCH, the Individual Calendar Hearing (ICH) provides an opportunity for the individual (respondent) to present their case and any applications for relief. This may include evidence, testimony, and legal arguments.

Testimony and Evidence:
The respondent, along with their attorney if they have one, will present their case, including evidence and witness testimony. The judge will question the parties to clarify any issues.

Legal Arguments and Closing Statements:
Both the respondent and DHS will present legal arguments based on relevant immigration laws and regulations. The parties will then make closing arguments, summarizing their positions.

Decision:
The immigration judge will make a decision based on the evidence and arguments presented, deciding whether the respondent should be removed, granted relief, or permitted to remain in the country.

Appeals:
If a party is dissatisfied with the judge’s decision, they can appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). BIA decisions can be further appealed to federal courts. Typically, such cases don’t go this far. (End of details provided by Google AI).

This is not the same due process as with higher misdemeanors or felonies, but it is a kind of due process. It has been sufficient for both Democrat and Republican Administrations for many decades without challenge.

3. What due process do illegal aliens, charged with belonging to terrorist groups, receive?

Their due process is controlled by the provisions in the USA PATRIOT ACT. There isn’t much there. The USA PATRIOT Act has broad implications for aliens in the United States, particularly regarding their right to due process. While the Act itself doesn’t explicitly deny due process, some provisions have raised concerns about the treatment of non-citizens, especially those suspected of terrorism or national security threats.

“Section 412 of the PATRIOT Act allows for the mandatory detention of aliens suspected of terrorism, or other national security threats, until they can be deported. The Act also enables expedited removal of certain aliens.” (Quotation from Google AI.) The operative word in the previous two sentences is “suspected.” Basically, membership in an organization deemed a terrorist organization can lead to such outcomes as mandatory detention prior to deportation and expedited deportation. Law enforcement can have a collection of evidence that leads to such a suspicion, and that is all it takes. There isn’t any provision for a trial in front of an “Article Three” judge. This has been true throughout the life of the USA PATRIOT ACT, some 24-25 years.

“Section 411 of the USA PATRIOT ACT of 2001 (8 U.S.C. § 1182) authorized the Secretary of State, in consultation with, or upon the request of the Attorney General, to designate terrorist organizations for immigration purposes. This authority is known as the ‘Terrorist Exclusion List (TEL)’ authority. Once on the Terrorist Exclusion List, members of an organization so designated are deemed terrorists under the statute.” (Quotation from Google AI.)

The USA PATRIOT ACT allows little opportunity (if any) for illegal aliens to avoid detention and/or deportation once the illegal alien is determined to be a member of a terrorist organization, or suspected with evidence of such membership. There isn’t much to dispute the way the law is written, and it’s been around for about 25 years unchallenged by either Democrat or Republican party.

4. What Due Process is involved when the Alien Enemies Act is applied to groups of aliens and the aliens who are involved in the group?

This is the main legal phenomenon that drives the present debate about “Due Process.” Apparently, few in Congress understand what has happened from the invocation of this statute. The Alien Enemies Act is now used in concert with the USA PATRIOT ACT. First comes the PATRIOT ACT. That is used to identify the aliens involved with transnational criminal organizations like Tren de Aragua (TdA), MS-13, and Mexican cartels like the Sinaloa Cartel as “TERRORISTS.” Once added to that list of terrorist organizations, aliens “suspected” with involvement with those organizations are now identifiable as terrorists. This craters their due process accordingly, and the cratering is LEGAL. No one complained about it since 2001 except some civil libertarians on the left and strict constructionists of the Constitution on the right. Get identified as a terrorist and the following could happen:

1. Sent to Guantanamo Bay without trial.
2. Deported without trial.
3. “RENDITIONED” to some Third World dictatorship for “enhanced interrogation” without trial.

Again, few complained about this, and we even get entertained by it when watching some movies and TV shows when a representative of law enforcement demands cooperation from a suspected terrorist while threatening them with “GITMO” (Guantanamo Bay) if they don’t cooperate. The Supreme Court has said little, if anything, about it.
Enter the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 (We will cover the 1798 thing in detail). The USA PATRIOT Act (passed by majorities of both parties) designates who is a terrorist. The Alien Enemies Act enables such people to be deported with minimal, if any, due process that is controlled by Section 23 of the statute. This section gives us a clue about why the statute got involved in this whole illegal alien situation in a kind of legal shotgun wedding to the USA PATRIOT Act.

When determining the legality of something done to these illegal migrants, both laws work in tandem. The designation of terrorists under USA PATRIOT opens them up to being declared Enemies of the United States under the Alien Enemies Act, which all terrorists are considered as being. Then the thing about due process in the Alien Enemies Act, Section 23, comes into play.

A lot of people, including a Federal District Court in Texas, seem to think if they can overturn a President’s Proclamation, that invokes the Alien Enemies Act, by claiming there is either not a war underway, or that no foreign country invaded this country in a D-Day style invasion. It is not likely that position is true for a few reasons:

1. Past court decisions, plus the most recent one by the Supreme Court, state actions under the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) are not subject to judicial review by any court. They especially can’t be overturned by local Federal District Court judges as their decisions only apply in their own districts.

2. Here is where the partnership with the USA PATRIOT Act comes into play. Anyone identified as a member of a group identified under USA PATRIOT Act as a Terrorist organization are terrorists themselves. Terrorists are enemies of the United States. So their being enemies is the first thread pulled to bring in AEA, and it was provided by the USA PATRIOT Act.

3. The second thread that needs pulled is the existence of a war with some country, or an invasion. No, the invasion doesn’t have to be like D-Day in World War II, nor does it have to be like in some movie like “Red Dawn.” The use of the Trojan Horse by the Greeks constituted an invasion of the City State of Troy, after all. So, the employees of the Mexican cartels, members of TdA, and members of MS-13 qualify as enemies, thanks to USA PATRIOT Act, who were infiltrated into the US with the legions of other migrants from 180 different countries who trekked into the US during the Biden Administration. These “caravans” constituted the Trojan Horse for this invasion. The hostile acts of TdA in the apartment complexes in Aurora, Colorado, complete with TdA members armed to the teeth and forcing their way into the apartments of US citizens, identify them as hostile illegal aliens. Both TdA and MS-13 are well-known, especially in this hemisphere, of being violent criminal organizations. The fact that we had no TdA problems until about 2022 also serves as evidence that they came into this country to perform violent, hostile operations by infiltrating into the country with non-criminal illegal aliens in the large caravans.

It was an invasion by hostile cartels, TdA and MS-13. So, now the AEA can be legally applied to these particular cases, but not to the overwhelming number of the illegal migrants here. They are destined to be handled in the Immigration Courts, or voluntarily deport themselves.
I promised to handle the whole AEA passed in 1798 “problem.” That age isn’t a problem because:

1. The law has not been repealed.

2. A sister law, called the Logan Act, was put on the books in 1799, just one year later. That law was used by the Obama Administration as a predicate to start an investigation into Donald Trump’s first Foreign Policy Advisor, General Michael Flynn, for allegedly interfering in the Obama Administration’s foreign policy decisions in 2017.

3. The AEA was used in 1812, 1917 (WWI), and in 1941 (WWII). It’s use in WWII, against US Citizens of Japanese ancestry, was done in violation of the act itself. Only ALIENS are to be subject to the AEA. US citizens can never have this law applied to them as explicitly stated in the name of the statute, “ALIEN Enemies Act,” not the “Alien Enemies and US Citizens of Japanese Ancestry Act.” Even J. Edgar Hoover objected to AEA’s use against Japanese Americans.

Section 23 Due Process
This is Section 23 of the Alien Enemies Act:

§23. Jurisdiction of United States courts and judges

“After any such (Presidential) proclamation has been made, the several courts of the United States, having criminal jurisdiction, and the several justices and judges of the courts of the United States, are authorized and it shall be their duty, upon complaint against any alien enemy resident and at large within such jurisdiction or district, to the danger of the public peace or safety, and contrary to the tenor or intent of such proclamation, or other regulations which the President may have established, to cause such alien to be duly apprehended and conveyed before such court, judge, or justice; and after a full examination and hearing on such complaint, and sufficient cause appearing, to order such alien to be removed out of the territory of the United States, or to give sureties for his good behavior, or to be otherwise restrained, conformably to the proclamation or regulations established as aforesaid, and to imprison, or otherwise secure such alien, until the order which may be so made shall be performed.”

Section 23 of the Alien Enemies Act empowers federal courts to review the removal of alien enemies, but this review is limited. It allows courts to hold a full examination and hearing to determine if sufficient cause exists for removal. However, this judicial review is primarily focused on ensuring the actions taken align with the president’s proclamation and regulations. This is still a higher level of due process than the use of the USA PATRIOT Act alone which enables accelerated deportations.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.