FreedomAdvocate

joined 2 weeks ago
[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

The invasion or predatory incursion is coming from a foreign nation, El Salvador.

I'm sorry but I don't understand how one person can be wrong about basically every single thing they point out.

Coincidentally this happened literally an hour ago:

https://www.nydailynews.com/2025/05/08/long-island-ms-13-sentence-omar-antonio-villalta-central-islip-murder/

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

apparently we've reached "max comment depth" down below so I'll reply here:

Yes? And did you keep reading? How those words are specifically used during wartime or invasion which this is clearly not?

You mean did I keep reading the very next sentence? I sure did!

The president has inherent authority to repel these kinds of sudden attacks — an authority that necessarily implies the discretion to decide when an invasion or predatory incursion is underway.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (6 children)

What exactly do you think in the bit you highlighted proves you right?

Can you read?

I'm asking myself the same thing about you based on this conversation.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

FROM YOUR OWN LINK:

But the president need not wait for Congress to invoke the law based on a threatened or ongoing invasion or predatory incursion.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (12 children)

It requires a declaration of war. Only Congress can do that.

It does not. As I suggested to the other person - Google it. It does not require a declaration of war:

“The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 allows the U.S. President to detain or deport individuals from enemy nations during wartime or in response to threats against the U.S.

Furthermore, people being legally deported under that act have protections

Which of the protections you linked to do you think were not followed? Here they are from your own link:

"When an alien who becomes liable as an enemy, in the manner prescribed in section 21 of this title, is not chargeable with actual hostility, or other crime against the public safety, he shall be allowed, for the recovery, disposal, and removal of his goods and effects, and for his departure, the full time which is or shall be stipulated by any treaty then in force between the United States and the hostile nation or government of which he is a native citizen, denizen, or subject; and where no such treaty exists, or is in force, the President may ascertain and declare such reasonable time as may be consistent with the public safety, and according to the dictates of humanity and national hospitality."

What treaty is in force between the United States and El Salvador? What does it state? If no such treaty exists, the President decides.

So, this is all illegal, and you need to read up on things you no nothing about.

The irony is just so, so delicious.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

hahahaha the mental gymnastics is gold medal worthy.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (15 children)

Yes the wartime Act? Is the us at war?

"The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 allows the U.S. President to detain or deport individuals from enemy nations during wartime or in response to threats against the U.S."

Congress is the only one that can declare war, correct, but the President doesn't need a war to be declared by congress in order to invoke the Alien Enemies Act. A quick google, which I have repeatedly encouraged you to do if you doubt what I'm saying, would have shown you this information right away. It's not hidden.

Oh so, the stay of deportation was perfectly fine, not by an “activist” judge.

Irellevant. Activist judge or not, the stay of deportation is overruled by the Alien Enemies Act.

view more: ‹ prev next ›