Legal Experts Warn

E

Earl

Well-known member

​

Legal experts warn the expedited removal expansion bypasses due process and puts citizens and long-term residents at risk​

BY:​


Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrest a fugitive in 2020. Photo via U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

The Trump administration has revived a border security policy that legal experts say paves the way for mass deportations — without even a court hearing — and threatens to put Latino Arizonans, regardless of their citizenship status, at risk of racial profiling and removal from the country.

On Friday, the White House officially reinstated a 2019 policy greenlighting fast-tracked deportation proceedings for immigrants living anywhere in the United States who can’t prove more than two years of continuous presence in the country. Known as expedited removal, people detained under the policy aren’t entitled to a court hearing, but are instead subject to immediate expulsion from the country.


Under the Biden administration, expedited removals were limited to people caught within 100 miles of the border with less than two weeks of continuous presence in the United States.

Increasing the number of people who can be deported is the Trump administration’s latest move against illegal immigration, capping a week of anti-immigration actions that saw the Republican block asylum applicationsand attempt to erase birthright citizenship. Immigrant advocates and legal experts alike believe that expanding the “border zone” — the region within which law enforcement officials can sidestep due process rights to detain people suspected of lacking proper authorization — to the entire country would make it far easier to realize the Republican’s campaign promise to expel more than 11 million undocumented people.

“This is a huge expansion that really sets up the groundwork for raids, rapid removal and racial profiling,” said Laura Belous, an attorney with the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project.

Removing due process protections provided by the immigration court system is a key part of Trump’s plan to expel millions of immigrants, said Lynn Marcus, the director of the Immigration Law Clinic at the University of Arizona.

“This is definitely one of the tools that the administration is trying to use to accomplish mass deportations, because it gets around all the procedural protections that people have in immigration courts and it allows them to remove people very quickly,” she said.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1172873698173810&id=100063535735460
View: https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1172873698173810&id=100063535735460&_rdr
 
Last edited:
Earl said:

​

Legal experts warn the expedited removal expansion bypasses due process and puts citizens and long-term residents at risk​

BY:​

Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrest a fugitive in 2020. Photo via U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

The Trump administration has revived a border security policy that legal experts say paves the way for mass deportations — without even a court hearing — and threatens to put Latino Arizonans, regardless of their citizenship status, at risk of racial profiling and removal from the country.

On Friday, the White House officially reinstated a 2019 policy greenlighting fast-tracked deportation proceedings for immigrants living anywhere in the United States who can’t prove more than two years of continuous presence in the country. Known as expedited removal, people detained under the policy aren’t entitled to a court hearing, but are instead subject to immediate expulsion from the country.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
SUBSCRIBE
Under the Biden administration, expedited removals were limited to people caught within 100 miles of the border with less than two weeks of continuous presence in the United States.

Increasing the number of people who can be deported is the Trump administration’s latest move against illegal immigration, capping a week of anti-immigration actions that saw the Republican block asylum applicationsand attempt to erase birthright citizenship. Immigrant advocates and legal experts alike believe that expanding the “border zone” — the region within which law enforcement officials can sidestep due process rights to detain people suspected of lacking proper authorization — to the entire country would make it far easier to realize the Republican’s campaign promise to expel more than 11 million undocumented people.

“This is a huge expansion that really sets up the groundwork for raids, rapid removal and racial profiling,” said Laura Belous, an attorney with the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project.

Removing due process protections provided by the immigration court system is a key part of Trump’s plan to expel millions of immigrants, said Lynn Marcus, the director of the Immigration Law Clinic at the University of Arizona.

“This is definitely one of the tools that the administration is trying to use to accomplish mass deportations, because it gets around all the procedural protections that people have in immigration courts and it allows them to remove people very quickly,” she said.
Click to expand...
Nordberg said:
Over half the people deported to Columbia had no criminal records. They were guilty of not being white enough.
Click to expand...
It’s legal.
 
Truck Fump / h1b said:
got a link?
Click to expand...


He's citing what the Colombian government said.

On January 28, 2025, the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that among the 201 Colombian nationals deported, none had criminal records in either Colombia or the United States. Their only noted offense was being in the U.S. illegally.


@Grok
 
Earl said:
I asked him for one on another thread…no link.
Click to expand...

On January 28, 2025, the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that among the 201 Colombian nationals deported, none had criminal records in either Colombia or the United States. Their only noted offense was being in the U.S. illegally.

@Grok
 
Diogenes said:
He's citing what the Colombian government said.

On January 28, 2025, the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that among the 201 Colombian nationals deported, none had criminal records in either Colombia or the United States. Their only noted offense was being in the U.S. illegally.


@Grok
Click to expand...
you gotta link?

Grok is untrustworthy.
 
The Colombian president said he would not allow illegals to land there.

Trump changed his mind.

Why should we believe anything he says?
 
Diogenes said:
On January 28, 2025, the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that among the 201 Colombian nationals deported, none had criminal records in either Colombia or the United States. Their only noted offense was being in the U.S. illegally.

@Grok
Click to expand...
do you trust the colombian government to be truthful on this issue?

if you do, you're stupid.

:truestory:
 
Nordberg said:
Over half the people deported to Columbia had no criminal records. They were guilty of not being white enough.
Click to expand...

The recent tensions between the U.S. and Colombia regarding deportation flights, as described in the news, revolve around the treatment of migrants and the methods of deportation rather than explicitly citing skin color as a reason for deportation.
 
Truck Fump / h1b said:
you gotta link?

Grok is untrustworthy.
Click to expand...


Grok says this about you:

Analyzing the reliability of user "Truck Fump / h1b" on www.justplainpolitics.com is challenging due to several factors:

  1. Nature of Online Forums:
    • Online forums like Just Plain Politics are typically platforms where anonymity is common, and users can express opinions without the burden of accountability. This means that the reliability of any user's information or opinions is often based more on the content of their posts rather than their identity or reputation within the forum.
  2. Content and Context:
    • The username "Truck Fump / h1b" suggests a political statement or satire, likely aimed at Donald Trump, with a reference to H-1B visas. This implies the user might be engaging in political discourse or commentary rather than providing factual or objective information. Given this context, the reliability of their posts would depend on whether they are offering opinion, satire, or factual information.
  3. User Engagement:
    • Based on the information available, "Truck Fump / h1b" has contributed to a thread with a significant number of messages (3.4K). High engagement might suggest the user is active and possibly influential within that thread. However, engagement does not directly correlate with reliability; it could mean the user is good at sparking discussion or controversy rather than providing reliable information.
  4. Forum Reputation:
    • Just Plain Politics is described as a forum for political junkies, which might attract users from all political spectrums. The reliability of users on such forums can vary widely. Some might be well-informed, while others might post misinformation or biased opinions. The forum's reputation for allowing free discussion of politics, including conspiracy theories, indicates a broad spectrum of reliability among its users.
  5. Verification of Information:
    • Without specific posts or direct quotes from "Truck Fump / h1b", it's difficult to verify the accuracy of their information. Political forums often echo chamber certain viewpoints, so the reliability would also depend on whether the user cross-references information with credible sources or merely echoes popular narratives within the forum's community.
  6. Critical Reception of the User:
    • There isn't explicit information on how other users perceive "Truck Fump / h1b" in terms of reliability. On forums, users might be known for their expertise, humor, or trolling, but without deeper context from specific threads or user interactions, it's hard to judge.

Given these considerations:

  • Reliability Assessment: Without access to specific posts or a broader analysis of user interactions, the reliability of "Truck Fump / h1b" remains uncertain. Their posts could range from well-researched opinions to satirical or intentionally misleading content. For serious or fact-based inquiries, one would need to look at individual posts, check for citations or references to external sources, and consider the community's response to their contributions.
  • Approach for Verification:
    • If you're looking to assess reliability, you'd need to:
      • Review specific posts for content accuracy, looking for citations or links to reliable external sources.
      • Observe how the user engages with others, whether they acknowledge counterarguments or adjust their stance based on new information.
      • Check for consistency in their arguments over time or across different topics.

In summary, while "Truck Fump / h1b" appears to be an active participant in political discussions, their reliability as a source of information would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, considering the context of each post and the nature of the forum itself.


@Grok
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top