Is the potential of 100’s of thousands of court challenges not a reason? We have 12-20 million illegal aliens here. We can’t do 12-20 million court cases. If we don’t come up with a solution, suspending Habeus for them will be the only way to solve it. I would prefer a solution like I outlined, but sans that not suspending Habeus for these cases is tantamount to governmental malfeasance. I don’t want it to happen, but if we don’t implement some solution, it will go there eventually.
1 Like
Thats because you loved the authoritarian democrats. You nodded your little head and agreed because you were scared and did not care about the constitution. Just like you don’t care about the constitution now. Hate is all you care about.
1 Like
amend the 17th to allow a 3rd Senator from each state appointed by the legislature. Yes, it would take an amendment.
It ain’t perfect, but at least it would allow some of the voice from the state legislatures back into the federal government. We broke the compact with the 17th, time to do something to fix our error
Ahhh…
Got’cha. Via amendment is OK.
WW
I understand in the day and time it was done it was thought to be needed, but the 17th broke the compact. It removed the voice of the states from the federal government and severely damaged the states check on the federal government. That was a very important check.
With all the dangerous illegal immigrants that invaded the country, and all the judges releasing them back in to our communities and all the Democrats trying to protectthem. Trump has no choice.
3 Likes
Outstanding!
Perfect!
the part that espouses neo nazism and fascism and antisemitism is indeed bad.
the part that wants to ignore the constitution is indeed bad.
Allan
I’m surprised at what betas MAGA is. Incessant whining. Willing to let a couple thousand gang bangers steal your Constitution. Tsk, tsk.
How about the part that espouses collectivism and socialism and equity, more accurately equality of outcomes?
2 Likes
Public safety may require it. Neither you nor I are the arbiters of that. We can agree or disagree with the powers who can decide, but that’s all we can do.
Also, whether or not foreign terrorist incursions into the US amount to an invasion also isn’t up to us.
And finally, like impeachment, it’s a political question and it will be whatever the Congress says it is.
I think we probably agree that these incursions do not amount to an invasion, and that the public safety is not sufficiently endangered to do so. But the decision is not ours. They can, they likely won’t (at least for now), but they can.
What a load of garbage. That is all…
“except”
you do know what that means right?
Section 9 Powers Denied Congress
You know what that means, right?
Yes, I know what “except” means, especially in this context.
It means it better be glaringly apparent and you better think about it long and hard.
This whole Miller Gambit is horse ■■■■■
Did I say otherwise? I agree with you that the FTO incursions do not amount to an invasion. That however does not preclude the Congress saying they do. I agree that the level of crime is not sufficient enough to say it endangers public safety. That however does not negate the fact that the Congress can say it does. They can do it. They shouldn’t, but they can. If a solution is not found, they eventually will.
Like i said much earlier. We got thru 9-11 without suspending Habeas Corpus…that was an all out attack…Does Illegal immigration rise to, or above the level of 9-11?
2 Likes
If you’re not in NYC or DC… yeah, kind of does. 9/11 was pictures on TV for most of the country.
Our immigration issue is a failed policy issue from every President and every party since Reagan gave us the plan to end it. So politicans fail and suspending Habeas is the solution? Cant support that.
1 Like
