Posted on 07/01/2025 9:25:58 AM PDT by Rummyfan
It’s a grim sign of the times that Old Joe Biden’s regime can open the door to millions upon millions of illegal migrants without a peep from the courts, but as soon as President Donald Trump tries to remove them, our self-anointed moral superiors in the judiciary burn the midnight oil to come up with pretexts to stop him. Trump has been trying to use the 1798 Alien Enemies Act as the legal foundation to remove Venezuelan gang members, but several courts, including the Supreme Court, have stymied him. Now, the final showdown has begun in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 states that “whenever there shall be a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion shall be perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States, by any foreign nation or government, and the President of the United States shall make public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being males of the age of fourteen years and upwards, who shall be within the United States, and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured and removed, as alien enemies.”
This law has the admirable directness and simplicity that was characteristic of statute-making in an earlier, less complicated age. The extract above continues for a lengthy paragraph, and then the Act goes on for a couple more, but that’s it. If a similar law were drafted in 2025, it would be 700 pages long.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Out! GET OUT!
But what if they identify as females?
Biden opened the borders with the full blessing of the Uniparty
Hey, give the Democrats a break. They are running out of dead voters and just want to replenish their voter roles with illegal alien voters.
INCLUDE THEM AS FAKES.
Congress amended the law to include females. This is good, because it shows that the law did not sit unnoticed. Congress has not only passed it once, but affirmed it later.
Yesterday, the New York Times ran a story perfectly illustrating that point, headlined “Appeals Court Weighs Trump’s Use of Alien Enemies Act for Deportations.” I shall now reveal a great secret of appellate practice, which made a sly appearance in the article.
In a case that could redefine the reach of presidential war powers, the Fifth Circuit is the first to weigh whether the President can invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 (AEA) —a dusty relic of the John Adams era— to summarily deport alleged members of a Venezuelan street gang. The law, originally designed to empower the president to detain or expel nationals of hostile nations during wartime or invasion, has been used only sparingly in U.S. history— mostly during declared wars.
But Trump’s Justice Department argued that the gang Tren de Aragua, which it claims has infiltrated 40 states and is tied to Venezuela’s Maduro regime, constitutes a modern-day invasion. The ACLU, representing a group of detained Venezuelan gangsters, called it a dangerous stretch —warning that redefining gang violence as war could hand future presidents a blank check to bypass normal due process protections in immigration cases.
The story reported on yesterday’s oral arguments, during which a three-judge panel questioned the lawyers about the case’s merits. At one point—and this is where the appellate magic happened— Judge Andrew Oldham (a Trump appointee) asked the ACLU lawyer, “Are we allowed to conduct a federal trial to countermand the president of the United States when he says this is an armed invasion?”
That question was a trap, and the ACLU lawyer, Lee Gelernt, walked right into it. “Mr. Gelernt,” the Times reported, “said that indeed the judges could.”
But when Judge Oldham asked Mr. Gelernt to cite a single case that supported his assertion, Gelernt admitted he couldn’t.
“Thank you for your candor,” Judge Oldham said with satisfaction. He might as well have said, “Checkmate!” And the ACLU’s fate was sealed.
By asking whether a federal trial could override a presidential determination of “armed invasion,” Judge Oldham reframed the dispute as about separation of powers, rather than statutory interpretation or immigration process.
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/jerome-bond-tuesday-july-1-2025-c
It should be simple, if one is in this country illegally, one is subject to immediate deportation, no matter what. If one is not an American citizen and is in this country, that means one is a guest and subject to being deported when they fail to honor and respect the laws and citizens of this country. Until the NWO’s big reset took affect in the western nations, most other countries have operated on these very same immigration principles.
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.