Mother and Daughter

Where was your concern for the constitution during lockdowns?

I was not as invested at politics, kind of, also I was in school, and barley remember the pandemic

1. Trumps convictions are in the process of being overturned in the appellate courts.
2. Look for "public danger". It's the exception that let's cops arrest you without a warrant if you are waving guns in public or driving drunk.

Yes, probable cause ie usually needed, and cops do not need it in some circumstances: say they see something illegal in plain view, and as you said, weaving guns around, although I can't for the life of me remember the term, I don't think it was "public danger" although I'll find it

Yea it was Exigent Circumstances

Your right about the 2nd one in terms of what it is

However 9ta2br.jpg (click to show)

The point is
1: he got convicted, and if those appeals are still pending, alright, but for now they are not overturned

2: we are talking about due process, yes police can arrest the wrong person as, well...detain, as long as they have good reason and let the person go when they find out they were wrong

But I'm talking about: you got arrested, now your on a flight to another country

I'm talking about not getting a trial, which would still happen

Kilmar Abrego Garcia had been found guilty of being here illegally. Twice. He had his trial.s. Just because Biden refused to enforce the law does not mean he didn’t get due process.

But a judge halted his deportation

And the trump administration really could have just challenged it in court

They could have done that, likely have won, possibly

Instead they took him

If the trump administration challenged it, I myself would not have liked that but it would have been legal

This isn't

9tg1dd.jpg (click to show)

I was gonna include this but I think I...I was as gonna respond to something else but might as well include his IG ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

The deportation had already taken place. And it doesn’t change the fact he was a terrorist and human trafficker

There hasn't been evidence anywhere proving this.

And that doesn't matter, the law was broken by the government

(And trust me if it was a terrorist id actually be way less caring about the government doing this, if the terrorism is actually terrorism, I don't want them redifining the word to include non terrorist stuff)

“There hasn’t been any evidence anywhere proving this.” https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/04/16/kilmar-abrego-garcia-ms-13-gang-member-history-violence

I gotta say

To some extent I have to give you props, but, I'm gonna go look for evidence that says otherwise, because I gotta feeling dhs ANC ice will say stuff like this

But I'm not discrediting you

Here's what I've seen

https://youtu.be/oe_drf1bJn8?si=CFvdHJvWg6ctbr6b

Update to thet↑

https://youtu.be/0n_GfNbJwDY?si=F4r13a7SOzPP-YYC

So I'm trynna figure this out

My big thing is

If he...oh I thought of thing

Why the absolute hell did the trump administration just go: to judge can you remove his no removal order

Judge: yea (or no)

(If no)

Trump admin: alright we challenge that, and brining evidence

If they have this, feels like they could win

*Didnt

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-1404
(8:25-cv-00951-PX)
KILMAR ARMANDO ABREGO GARCIA; JENNIFER STEFANIA VASQUEZ
SURA; A.A.V., a minor, by and through his next friend and mother, Jennifer
Vasquez Sura,
Plaintiffs – Appellees,
v.
KRISTI NOEM; TODD LYONS; KENNETH GENALO; NIKITA BAKER;
PAMELA JO BONDI; MARCO RUBIO,
Defendants – Appellants.

(Searching this should directly give you the document but I remember I got mad at someone not sourcing so)

Link: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/docs/pdfs/251404order.pdf%3Fsfvrsn%3Db404b209_2&ved=2ahUKEwjLxf6WnZmNAxViMNAFHY5eN8AQFnoECAwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3TOeGBI3oBe4H4nwTfccdS

(I will formatt this in a way different from its original form)

Page two of 7:
It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter.

But in this case, it is not hard at all.

The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our
constitutional order.

Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done.

This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that
Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.

The government asserts that Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS-13.

Perhaps, but perhaps not.

Regardless, he is still entitled to due process. If the government
is confident of its position, it should be assured that position will prevail in proceedings to
terminate the withholding of removal order. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.24(f) (requiring that the
government prove “by a preponderance of evidence” that the alien is no longer entitled to a withholding of removal).

Moreover, the government has conceded that Abrego Garcia was wrongly or “mistakenly” deported. Why then should it not make what was wrong, right?

Tldr: if he is really a gang member and stuff, why do they just not challenge the withholding order? You would probably win

The trial would still happen even if you got wrongly arrested (usually as we are seeing it's not always)

You don't seem to understand. A law passed by congress does not override the constitution. The only reason a cop can arrest you without a warrant is because they consider you a public danger.
In the past you could make the argument that things were too slow so they might arrest you and hold you for 24 hours.
That excuse no longer flies as they can video the evidence message it to a judge and the judge can sign a warrant all under a minute. If you get arrested without a warrant or public danger you can criminaly prosecute the cop and any judge that doesn't dismiss the case in a constitutional court.

It's Party Time !