As a lawyer, I agree and support this post. I find Snyder’s warning chillingly accurate: once the government can unilaterally deny due process by claiming someone isn’t a citizen, every American’s rights hang on nothing more than the government’s word — and that is the essence of tyranny. Now following. Thanks Jonathan.
With today's news that the Democrats voted against impeachment because of the unapproved bombings, it seems that now we have the Republican and Democratic parties, Supreme Court, Corporations, and Billionaires aligned against the American people. It seems that an International Court is our only hope. The Big Bill will pass with Democratic approval, which the Republicans do not need, and we will lose everything. Someone must act. We have enough attorneys in Substack to contact the International Court for guidance. That, or pack up and leave to where?
If I’m understanding the procedure correctly, the stay of the preliminary injunction is supposed to affect people subject to a removal order but whom the regime has decided to apply the exception to that allows them to deport to a third country when the home country is “impossible/impractical” (or whatever the statutory wording is).
Which means, the affected persons haven’t by virtue of the stay lost their right to “due process” that leads to the removal order. They’ve lost the right to a second round of process to specifically challenge the third country decision to send them somewhere they have no practical chance of survival (how the fuck is a Latin American or East Asian supposed to survive in an Arab North African country? How the fuck is a non-Muslim woman supposed to survive in fucking Saudi Arabia?! WTAF)?
Just got done reading Sotomayor’s dissent and I feel pretty confident that I do understand the procedure right.
As applies to Kilmar Abrego for example, it goes something like this:
Regime: plz give us removal order so we can send him home to El Salvador.
Immigration court: hmm. You can remove him, but not to El Salvador because he might be persecuted, tortured or killed there. Here’s your removal order. You only mentioned El Salvador, so I assume that means he’s not going anywhere.
Regime: cool thanks. Now we will drop him anyfuckingwhere we feel like.
Sotomayor: what? No! You’re trying to do an end-run around the whole due process to prevent persecution torture or death thing.
Do I have that about right?
I’m inclined to read this as maybe SCOTUS just bailing out the regime over the Djibouti debacle. Like Sotomayor says on page 9, briefing on the merits is ongoing in the 1st Circuit. This is just about staying the prelim injunction, and due to an apparent lack of regard for the basic human rights of POC, SCOTUS was willing to open the valves for the regime for the moment.
As a lawyer, I agree and support this post. I find Snyder’s warning chillingly accurate: once the government can unilaterally deny due process by claiming someone isn’t a citizen, every American’s rights hang on nothing more than the government’s word — and that is the essence of tyranny. Now following. Thanks Jonathan.
With today's news that the Democrats voted against impeachment because of the unapproved bombings, it seems that now we have the Republican and Democratic parties, Supreme Court, Corporations, and Billionaires aligned against the American people. It seems that an International Court is our only hope. The Big Bill will pass with Democratic approval, which the Republicans do not need, and we will lose everything. Someone must act. We have enough attorneys in Substack to contact the International Court for guidance. That, or pack up and leave to where?
If I’m understanding the procedure correctly, the stay of the preliminary injunction is supposed to affect people subject to a removal order but whom the regime has decided to apply the exception to that allows them to deport to a third country when the home country is “impossible/impractical” (or whatever the statutory wording is).
Which means, the affected persons haven’t by virtue of the stay lost their right to “due process” that leads to the removal order. They’ve lost the right to a second round of process to specifically challenge the third country decision to send them somewhere they have no practical chance of survival (how the fuck is a Latin American or East Asian supposed to survive in an Arab North African country? How the fuck is a non-Muslim woman supposed to survive in fucking Saudi Arabia?! WTAF)?
Do I have the procedure right?
Just got done reading Sotomayor’s dissent and I feel pretty confident that I do understand the procedure right.
As applies to Kilmar Abrego for example, it goes something like this:
Regime: plz give us removal order so we can send him home to El Salvador.
Immigration court: hmm. You can remove him, but not to El Salvador because he might be persecuted, tortured or killed there. Here’s your removal order. You only mentioned El Salvador, so I assume that means he’s not going anywhere.
Regime: cool thanks. Now we will drop him anyfuckingwhere we feel like.
Sotomayor: what? No! You’re trying to do an end-run around the whole due process to prevent persecution torture or death thing.
Do I have that about right?
I’m inclined to read this as maybe SCOTUS just bailing out the regime over the Djibouti debacle. Like Sotomayor says on page 9, briefing on the merits is ongoing in the 1st Circuit. This is just about staying the prelim injunction, and due to an apparent lack of regard for the basic human rights of POC, SCOTUS was willing to open the valves for the regime for the moment.
I’d love to be right…
This is what I sent to SCOTUS today.
An actual sympathy card for America
With deepest sympathy for our loss of constitutional laws upheld.
I think all my letters from now on will be sent in a sympathy card. Our country is dying and they’re allowing it.
SCOTUS
1 First St. NE
Washington DC, 20543