These judges need to be very afraid of keeping this up. Messages need to be sent.

Dear Federal Judges:

We The People are the sovereign.

The cornerstone of sovereignty is control of our border.

We lend the federal government limited, specific, enumerated, and divided powers.

Congress may create due-process rights for the expulsion of illegal aliens, if it…

— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) June 5, 2025

Quote:

---

Dear Federal Judges:

We The People are the sovereign.

The cornerstone of sovereignty is control of our border.

We lend the federal government limited, specific, enumerated, and divided powers.

Congress may create due-process rights for the expulsion of illegal aliens, if it chooses.

But we never gave you that power.

Not at our founding.

Not after the Civil War.

Not in any subsequent Congress.

Certainly not after the last election.

You allowed Biden to illegally mass-import over 10,000,000 illegal aliens, including terrorists.

Now you're illegally stopping Trump from expelling the worst terrorists and their enablers.

You are violating one of our most important sovereign rights.

You are destroying your legitimacy with a large swath of Americans.

---

Champion of Fireball said:

---

These judges need to be very afraid of keeping this up. Messages need to be sent.

---

Why don't you get on that and see how it goes

The executive branch should ignore ALL nationwide district court injunctions until SCOTUS decisively establishes that they are even lawful. They were not a thing at all until the 1960's. For the first 180 years of the nations history, that power was not recognized and it is absolutely not established by the constitution explicitly.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

The executive branch should ignore ALL nationwide district court injunctions until SCOTUS decisively establishes that they are even lawful. They were not a thing at all until the 1960's. For the first 180 years of the nations history, that power was not recognized and it is absolutely not established by the constitution explicitly.

---

this is not a nationwide injunction, so even when SCOTUS does make this decision, it won't affect these types of situations where a class certified gets an injunction.



(I am not saying certification or the injunction is proper here, just that its not a "nationwide injunction" as so many judges are doing now)

Quote:

---

"In short, the Government must facilitate the Class's ability to seek habeas relief to contest their removal under the Act

---

Absolute ****ing insanity.
If you don't think Democrats hate the America we know, look no further than this ruling.

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

Quote:

---

the Government must facilitate the Class's ability

---

There is that word again! "Facilitate."

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

---

So if they cross the river and then ask for an attorney, they should be free to go and we should pay for their attorney and incarceration before deporting them?

There is only a procedural question to ask, by an Article II judge.

Are you a legal resident of the United States or do you have other, valid, active permission to be in the United States? If the answer is no, you are deported.

Far enough. If it is a specific certified class then the government has to win its case or appeal, but there is clearly an effort ongoing to implement a Cloward Pliven strategy in our federal court system to selectively interdict the executive branch, as our legal system is inadequate to the task of timely processing the case load that a good portion of it claims are legitimate.

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

---

Why is it so hard for folks to understand that we have laws and violation of those laws comes with consequences? Also, why is it so hard for the bleeding hearts to come to the reality that those of us that pay the bills are fcking tired of illegals suckling off of the American taxpayer teat and that if you are here illegally, the government can summarily tell you to GTFO without cause because YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE HERE.

I bet an untold amount of money if you came home and somebody you didn't know was camped up in your living room you'd want them out of your house, no questions asked. And you'd throw a gatdamned fit if when the cops showed up they said "sorry, we are going to have to go through a long and lengthy legal process because they are contesting that you have the right to tell them to leave your house, so just deal with it".

You'd throw a bigger fit if the cops showed up and escorted the intruders out of your house but some judge somewhere decided to overturn that decision and allow them back in your house against your will simply because they don't like your politics, the cops, where you live, etc.

Or would you just shrug your shoulders and say "okay, guess these people that I don't know who broke into my house illegally and decided to camp out will stay here on my dime until somebody somewhere decides that they need to leave, if they ever make that decision"?

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

---

it was unamerican to open the border intentionally and subject American citizens to dangerous risks from gangs, cartels, terrorists, and criminals- drug and human trafficking, etc. ..to put on the tax payer, who funds the government, the onus of transporting, sheltering, and feeding them by the millions, as well as the burden of public/tax funded services like roads, first responders, peace officers, hospitals, schools, etc. ...all of that was unamerican. Removing illegal aliens from America and asking them to try again legally without phony asylum claims or sneaking in is not unamerican.

schmellba99 said:

---

---

The better analogy would be if some people broke into my house and they were facing jail time for breaking and entering or burglary or criminal trespass or whatever. I would fully expect there to be an opportunity for them to contest their guilt, claim they had a valid reason to be there, etc before they could be sentenced to imprisonment. And they would have the right to bring a habeas petition if they claimed they were being held illegally.

It's irrelevant that I'm mad at them for being in my house without permission. It's irrelevant that I didn't get some form of judicial process from them before they committed a crime against my property.

"No person shall be… deprived of… liberty… without due process of law." To imprison people in a Salvadoran gulag without due process of law is unconstitutional, period. It really doesn't matter that it's inconvenient. It's supposed to be inconvenient to incarcerate people. Not citizens, people.

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

"No person shall be… deprived of… liberty… without due process of law." To imprison people in a Salvadoran gulag without due process of law is unconstitutional, period. It really doesn't matter that it's inconvenient. It's supposed to be inconvenient to incarcerate people. Not citizens, people.

---

If you're El Salvadorian and get deported back home due to being a criminal piece of ****, and when you get home your govt puts you into prison.....oh well.

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

"No person shall be… deprived of… liberty… without due process of law." To imprison people in a Salvadoran gulag without due process of law is unconstitutional, period. It really doesn't matter that it's inconvenient. It's supposed to be inconvenient to incarcerate people. Not citizens, people.

---

He had due process, and what due process looks like for each person is different based on if they are an ILLEGAL or not.

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

The better analogy would be if some people broke into my house and they were facing jail time for breaking and entering or burglary or criminal trespass or whatever. I would fully expect there to be an opportunity for them to contest their guilt, claim they had a valid reason to be there, etc before they could be sentenced to imprisonment. And they would have the right to bring a habeas petition if they claimed they were being held illegally.

It's irrelevant that I'm mad at them for being in my house without permission. It's irrelevant that I didn't get some form of judicial process from them before they committed a crime against my property.

---

You are an idiot sir!

How much brain damage do you have to defend wife beating, human trafficking, gang banging illegal aliens?

BadMoonRisin said:

---

How much brain damage do you have to defend wife beating, human trafficking, gang banging illegal aliens?

---

How much brain damage do you have to have to vote for Biden or be a Democrat? its pervasive in our society. Maybe if RFK Jr is successful with MAHA there will be much less brain damage in America.

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

---

They aren't incarcerated by our government. Case closed.

schmellba99 said:

---

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

---

Why is it so hard for folks to understand that we have laws and violation of those laws comes with consequences? Also, why is it so hard for the bleeding hearts to come to the reality that those of us that pay the bills are fcking tired of illegals suckling off of the American taxpayer teat and that if you are here illegally, the government can summarily tell you to GTFO without cause because YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE HERE.

I bet an untold amount of money if you came home and somebody you didn't know was camped up in your living room you'd want them out of your house, no questions asked. And you'd throw a gatdamned fit if when the cops showed up they said "sorry, we are going to have to go through a long and lengthy legal process because they are contesting that you have the right to tell them to leave your house, so just deal with it".

You'd throw a bigger fit if the cops showed up and escorted the intruders out of your house but some judge somewhere decided to overturn that decision and allow them back in your house against your will simply because they don't like your politics, the cops, where you live, etc.

Or would you just shrug your shoulders and say "okay, guess these people that I don't know who broke into my house illegally and decided to camp out will stay here on my dime until somebody somewhere decides that they need to leave, if they ever make that decision"?

---

You know something very close to this scenario is already happening in certain states. Squatters move into an empty house and the owner of said house can't get them out without a long legal process.

schmellba99 said:

---

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

---

Why is it so hard for folks to understand that we have laws and violation of those laws comes with consequences? Also, why is it so hard for the bleeding hearts to come to the reality

---

They are not bleeding hearts. They are marxists.

schmellba99 said:

---

---

Over the price/taxes on tea. I saw a meme this week that 'we should tar and feather just one congressman/woman, and see what happens.' About right.

That piece of **** judge better get his comeuppance. He has made this personal and he is wrong in his rulings. I want to see this guy disbarred. I want to see him arrested. I want to see him charged. I want to see him convicted and I want see him go to prison. What he is doing is against his oath of office and it is actually harming America and Americans.

Nah. I want to see him forced to sentence Kilmar to 30 years in ADX Florence.

Of course that won't happen because he's not a trial judge but it would be hilarious.

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

---

If you are here illegally, you don't get that.

Trump admin has appealed the Bozoberg order:

2/ Full brief: https://t.co/gu6SCFApbh

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) June 10, 2025

Update on this pos...

BREAKING: DOJ has filed a misconduct complaint against activist Judge James Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump

"These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, and we will not stand for that." - AG Pam Bondi pic.twitter.com/jw3VeqKtQq

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) July 29, 2025

he needs to go away and stop impeding the rule of law.

I wonder if he will get the Kevin treatment?

rocky the dog said:

---

---

Rattler12 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Loquacious Lunchbox said:

---

Why is it unamerican to say people who are subjected to incarceration by our government must have some means to contest whether that ongoing incarceration is in fact legal?

---

Why is it so hard for folks to understand that we have laws and violation of those laws comes with consequences? Also, why is it so hard for the bleeding hearts to come to the reality that those of us that pay the bills are fcking tired of illegals suckling off of the American taxpayer teat and that if you are here illegally, the government can summarily tell you to GTFO without cause because YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE HERE.

I bet an untold amount of money if you came home and somebody you didn't know was camped up in your living room you'd want them out of your house, no questions asked. And you'd throw a gatdamned fit if when the cops showed up they said "sorry, we are going to have to go through a long and lengthy legal process because they are contesting that you have the right to tell them to leave your house, so just deal with it".

You'd throw a bigger fit if the cops showed up and escorted the intruders out of your house but some judge somewhere decided to overturn that decision and allow them back in your house against your will simply because they don't like your politics, the cops, where you live, etc.

Or would you just shrug your shoulders and say "okay, guess these people that I don't know who broke into my house illegally and decided to camp out will stay here on my dime until somebody somewhere decides that they need to leave, if they ever make that decision"?

---

You know something very close to this scenario is already happening in certain states. Squatters move into an empty house and the owner of said house can't get them out without a long legal process.

---

Seems to me if they have broken into your home, you can shoot them as you would any home invader and the problem is solved.

He's a public servant, so I'll just leave this here: Boasberg_Chambers@dcd.uscourts.gov.

Do NOT email judges. The US Marshalls take any type of derogatory email seriously and you will end up on a list at best and probably get an unfriendly visit from some feds.

misterguinness said:

---

He's a public servant, so I'll just leave this here: Boasberg_Chambers@dcd.uscourts.gov.

---

chiphijason said:

---

Do NOT email judges. The US Marshalls take any type of derogatory email seriously and you will end up on a list at best and probably get an unfriendly visit from some feds.

misterguinness said:

---

He's a public servant, so I'll just leave this here: Boasberg_Chambers@dcd.uscourts.gov.

---

---

The populace not dealing with issues directly, and instead deferring to their political "leaders" to deal with issues, is exactly why our government has grown so big and corrupt. Relying on bad gov to investigate and deal with bad gov is how you get more bad gov. The people are either shying away from speaking their mind or are becoming apathetic, neither of which are good long term.