Comments by "" (@indonesiaamerica7050) on "Judge weighs consequences of Trump deportations without hearings" video.

  1.  @theTrinity431  The judge that tried to bring "Equity" to Trump's administration also spent a stint as on FISC. He was presiding FISA judge in the late #45 and early #46 Presidencies.
    1
  2. Name the judge you have in mind.
    1
  3. Zero. What it does is it creates an atmosphere where Trump's officers are afraid to follow lawful orders. That's the intent.
    1
  4.  @JeffSpeen  That's what the judge is supposed to do. Because he did not do that it is the judge that needs education and maybe you do as well. In law school when they discuss these kinds of problems with the judicial branch they refer you to (judicial) Political Question doctrine. Or to put it very simply, if POTUS is alleged to have broke a law or mores or whatever the Constitutional process to "check" his power is Impeachment. Article III, Section 2, Clause 1: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State, between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. The political question doctrine limits the ability of the federal courts to hear constitutional questions even where other justiciability requirements, such as standing, ripeness, and mootness, would otherwise be met.
    1
  5.  @margaretgarana911  What in the world would I "report" your post for?
    1
  6.  @margaretgarana911  That's a nonsense comment not just because of capitalization and punctuation neglect but additionally because it means nothing without an explanation. Checks and balances have been slowly destroyed by the party of FDR. Also the party of slavery. Same party. Examples of checks and balances would be if FDR had been Impeached for threatening to pack SCOTUS. Or Impeaching AND Removing Andrew Johnson for inheriting the Oval Office through assassination and then blocking all of the post-slavery reforms on Lincoln's agenda at the time of Lincoln's assassination. Even Obama deserved Impeachment because of this kind of authoritarian abuse that had become normalized since FDR. Schumer and others should have been prosecuted for their threats against SCOTUS. So, basically, your gibberish doesn't make sense and what is truly well established in the courts and every US law school is the doctrine of "political questions" that can't be answered by judges. If "the demos" aka "the people" truly want something done about shipping out alien terrorists en masse (without trials) they can demand that Congress Impeach Rubio and or Trump. That would itself be an abuse of Impeachment but it's still legal and "normal" for handling "political questions" with respect to legitimate Presidential powers.
    1
  7. @margaretgarana911  What law school and what year?
    1
  8. He's loyal to US Communists, who are obviously traitors to the actual US Constitution.
    1