Excellent article today, Gabe. I wish everyone were required to read this as well as other offerings of yours. In my opinion, a major cause of the chaos we're going through is an uninformed voting public.
Excellent article…..I find that if I understand why relatives or friends are not allowed on juries where their family member or friend is the defendant, it’s easy to understand why judges HAVE to be independent. Of course we want gang members deported, but also keep in mind Immigrants commit less crime percentage wise than natives.
Thank you, Gabe. I appreciate your fair-mindedness in your reporting. Also, I find it interesting that I had never heard of these attacks at the border. It gives some weight to Trump's actions, which surprises me.
I think about protestors on college campuses who are in danger of deportation because of their support for Palestine. While I believe Israel should be held accountable for its destruction of Gaza, I don't think Hamas is good. Are protestors actually supporting Hamas? While there is something to be said about the First Amendment, I know I would oppose supporters, say, of the KKK. What is the line between violent rhetoric and free speech?
“Without knowing whether or not you’ll be in power, do you think it makes sense for the Senate to pass bills with 51 votes, or 60? Should a single judge be able to set nationwide policy, or should that power be reserved for appeals court or Supreme Court judges? Anyone whose answers on these questions varies based on their position is asking to not be taken seriously.”
… THIS. IS. PURE. GOLD.
and is why I cannot take most politicians seriously any more.
Then what is your solution? We can’t have a government without them. My concern is that by painting all politicians with such a broad brush we discourage good people from ever running for office and thus deprive ourselves of good governance. Our ways of thinking about the world have a huge effect on our ability to thrive in it. And this knee jerk negatively about politicians is one way we doom ourselves to mediocrity - and worse.
I honestly see no solution. Make me emperor for a day and I have no solution.
But I said “most” … and seeing how almost (emphasis on almost) all of the politicians on <pick a side> change their voting / what they say depending on who has a majority at the time, unfortunately I stand by my original comment.
I agree that we have deprived ourselves of good governance … for years I have asked why anyone would run for congress or president … and from what I have seen (and read) over the years, even good candidates (meaning folks with the right focus and great ideals when they were elected) who win are quickly drawn into the “system” of Congress because otherwise they are isolated and without influence.
"Migrants who have entered the U.S. illegally and have not claimed asylum still retain certain constitutional rights. It's important to understand that the application of these rights can be complex and subject to legal interpretation. Here's a breakdown:
• Due Process:
o The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees that "no person...shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." This protection extends to all people within U.S. borders, regardless of their immigration status.
o This means that individuals have the right to certain legal procedures, even in deportation proceedings. However, the specifics of these procedures can vary.
• Right to Remain Silent:
o Individuals have the right to remain silent when questioned by law enforcement or immigration officials.
• Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures:
o The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
• Access to Courts:
o Individuals have the right to access the courts.
• Access to emergency medical care:
o Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) hospitals that participate in medicare must provide emergency stabilizing medical care to anyone that needs it, regardless of immigration status."
The Congress should vote to streamline the process due to this category of migrant. This could be accomplished by shifting the burden of proof to the migrant to demonstrate that s/he has some claim to a status which would foreclose deportation. Sending a migrant home to a “sh*thole” country should not qualify as refoulement. Our immigration law has become “an ass” because Congress has shirked its duty for well more than 40 years. There is a continuing crisis of a lack of a common sense immigration reform.
I read your article and the question is how does the administration really know that these guys are all gang members or did they just sweep a bunch of guys up with no solid proof.
This is a wonderful piece Gabe. Thank you. It lays out so clearly what the framers of our constitution intended, why our government is structured the way it is and why current developments have been so dangerous, even though some people have defended Trump’s actions by saying he was doing what the voters wanted him to do. One additional piece I would add is that there was no due process involved in determining whether the men being deported were members of the Venezuelan gang. In fact as far as I know there was no due process involved in determining whether they were even Venezuelan. The whole incident reeks of political theater.
The current situation reminds me of the movie, "A Man For All Seasons", the story of Sir Thomas Moore. Near the movie's end, there is a wonderful courtroom scene, in which Sir Thomas, realizes he is about to be condemned to death, through perjury, from a former student. His speech on the law and its preciousness is well worth hearing. The movie itself is worth seeing, but finding the time is difficult for many today.
Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper:
Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More:
Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
Those are the words that still, all these years later, pulse through my head, especially as I look at the present situation. Thank you, for however you found the dialogue, it is perfect. Am much obliged.
An analogy might be to the old solution of how to fairly divide a cake among two brothers. Let one cut the cake and let the other chose his piece. Seems Trump wants to cut the cake and then take his piece first to make sure he gets the biggest piece.
Excellent article today, Gabe. I wish everyone were required to read this as well as other offerings of yours. In my opinion, a major cause of the chaos we're going through is an uninformed voting public.
Gabe, this was a fantastic article. I intend on having my students read it as part of my AmGov class.
Love this!!
You nailed this today, Gabe. Thanks for your insights
Excellent article…..I find that if I understand why relatives or friends are not allowed on juries where their family member or friend is the defendant, it’s easy to understand why judges HAVE to be independent. Of course we want gang members deported, but also keep in mind Immigrants commit less crime percentage wise than natives.
Grateful for your research and explanations. Thank you.
Thank you, Gabe. I appreciate your fair-mindedness in your reporting. Also, I find it interesting that I had never heard of these attacks at the border. It gives some weight to Trump's actions, which surprises me.
I think about protestors on college campuses who are in danger of deportation because of their support for Palestine. While I believe Israel should be held accountable for its destruction of Gaza, I don't think Hamas is good. Are protestors actually supporting Hamas? While there is something to be said about the First Amendment, I know I would oppose supporters, say, of the KKK. What is the line between violent rhetoric and free speech?
Good point. Criticism of Israel’s actions is absolutely not the same thing as support for Hamas, though there are some who would paint it so.
“Without knowing whether or not you’ll be in power, do you think it makes sense for the Senate to pass bills with 51 votes, or 60? Should a single judge be able to set nationwide policy, or should that power be reserved for appeals court or Supreme Court judges? Anyone whose answers on these questions varies based on their position is asking to not be taken seriously.”
… THIS. IS. PURE. GOLD.
and is why I cannot take most politicians seriously any more.
Then what is your solution? We can’t have a government without them. My concern is that by painting all politicians with such a broad brush we discourage good people from ever running for office and thus deprive ourselves of good governance. Our ways of thinking about the world have a huge effect on our ability to thrive in it. And this knee jerk negatively about politicians is one way we doom ourselves to mediocrity - and worse.
Thanks for your question.
I honestly see no solution. Make me emperor for a day and I have no solution.
But I said “most” … and seeing how almost (emphasis on almost) all of the politicians on <pick a side> change their voting / what they say depending on who has a majority at the time, unfortunately I stand by my original comment.
I agree that we have deprived ourselves of good governance … for years I have asked why anyone would run for congress or president … and from what I have seen (and read) over the years, even good candidates (meaning folks with the right focus and great ideals when they were elected) who win are quickly drawn into the “system” of Congress because otherwise they are isolated and without influence.
Gabe, your article is world class. Your article was classic journalism, just the facts! Thank you
Thank you for the clarity of your thinking and explanations!
According to Google Gemini:
"Migrants who have entered the U.S. illegally and have not claimed asylum still retain certain constitutional rights. It's important to understand that the application of these rights can be complex and subject to legal interpretation. Here's a breakdown:
• Due Process:
o The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees that "no person...shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." This protection extends to all people within U.S. borders, regardless of their immigration status.
o This means that individuals have the right to certain legal procedures, even in deportation proceedings. However, the specifics of these procedures can vary.
• Right to Remain Silent:
o Individuals have the right to remain silent when questioned by law enforcement or immigration officials.
• Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures:
o The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
• Access to Courts:
o Individuals have the right to access the courts.
• Access to emergency medical care:
o Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) hospitals that participate in medicare must provide emergency stabilizing medical care to anyone that needs it, regardless of immigration status."
The Congress should vote to streamline the process due to this category of migrant. This could be accomplished by shifting the burden of proof to the migrant to demonstrate that s/he has some claim to a status which would foreclose deportation. Sending a migrant home to a “sh*thole” country should not qualify as refoulement. Our immigration law has become “an ass” because Congress has shirked its duty for well more than 40 years. There is a continuing crisis of a lack of a common sense immigration reform.
Thank you. You are trying to remain balanced and honest and factual. I will join soon!!
I enjoy your writing, read almost daily, please please PLEASE don't use AI image slop.
I’d like to chime in on this. Why not just post a picture of Alexander Hamilton? There must be at least one or two that are not copyright protected.
I read your article and the question is how does the administration really know that these guys are all gang members or did they just sweep a bunch of guys up with no solid proof.
This is a wonderful piece Gabe. Thank you. It lays out so clearly what the framers of our constitution intended, why our government is structured the way it is and why current developments have been so dangerous, even though some people have defended Trump’s actions by saying he was doing what the voters wanted him to do. One additional piece I would add is that there was no due process involved in determining whether the men being deported were members of the Venezuelan gang. In fact as far as I know there was no due process involved in determining whether they were even Venezuelan. The whole incident reeks of political theater.
The current situation reminds me of the movie, "A Man For All Seasons", the story of Sir Thomas Moore. Near the movie's end, there is a wonderful courtroom scene, in which Sir Thomas, realizes he is about to be condemned to death, through perjury, from a former student. His speech on the law and its preciousness is well worth hearing. The movie itself is worth seeing, but finding the time is difficult for many today.
William Roper:
So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More:
Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper:
Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More:
Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
Thank You!
Those are the words that still, all these years later, pulse through my head, especially as I look at the present situation. Thank you, for however you found the dialogue, it is perfect. Am much obliged.
An analogy might be to the old solution of how to fairly divide a cake among two brothers. Let one cut the cake and let the other chose his piece. Seems Trump wants to cut the cake and then take his piece first to make sure he gets the biggest piece.