Author Topic: Immigration; weaponized immigration; deportation  (Read 806677 times)


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration; weaponized immigration; deportation
« Reply #2351 on: February 07, 2025, 04:25:11 PM »
I was being lazy and wrote IA for Illegal alien-- but you are correct, this led to confusion.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20359
    • View Profile
Newsweek to Drudge top fake "news"
« Reply #2352 on: February 11, 2025, 07:09:08 AM »
Trump deportation down by "50" compared to Biden !!!!!

https://www.newsweek.com/immigrant-deportations-removals-trump-biden-obama-compared-chart-2026835

Of course they fail to mention border crossing attempts down 90% !

Sleazeball press.....

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
    • View Profile
FEMA Senior Official Dumped for Funding Hotels for Illegals et al
« Reply #2353 on: February 11, 2025, 02:08:31 PM »
@bennyjohnson

BREAKING: This is Big. Senior DHS Official has just confirmed to me that FEMA’s Chief Financial Officer Mary Comans was just fired for illegally funding migrant luxury hotels in NYC against the orders of President Trump.

Comans is arguably most powerful person at FEMA, controlling billions in funding.

“Effective immediately, FEMA is terminating the employment of four individuals for circumventing leadership to unilaterally make egregious payments for luxury NYC hotels for migrants. Firings include FEMA’s Chief Financial Officer, two program analysts and a grant specialist.

Under President Trump and Secretary Noem’s leadership, DHS will not sit idly and allow deep state activists to undermine the will and safety of the American people.”

This is an earthquake

(Official says they have not ruled out criminal charges.)

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
    • View Profile
Bondi Files Charges Against NY
« Reply #2354 on: February 12, 2025, 07:29:49 PM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
AG Bondi begins to flex against States' interference
« Reply #2355 on: February 13, 2025, 07:22:57 AM »


(4) TRUMP ADMIN SUES NY OVER IMMIGRATION POLICIES: Attorney General Pam Bondi said the Trump administration is suing the state of New York and Gov. Kathy Hochul over New York’s immigration policies.

Bondi said New York’s Green Light Law, which requires state officials to notify illegal immigrants when federal immigration officials request their information from the Department of Motor Vehicles, is “tipping off” illegal immigrants and unconstitutional. “If you’re a state not complying with federal law, you’re next, get ready,” Bondi added.

Why It Matters: The Trump administration is engaging in its own lawfare campaign to get “sanctuary” states and cities to comply with federal immigration laws. Trump’s DOJ created a “sanctuary city” working group last month, to go after local and state officials who oppose or interfere with ICE operations. The Trump administration is likely starting with civil actions to gain compliance, before resorting to criminal charges. - R.C.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
    • View Profile
Newsom Folds
« Reply #2357 on: February 13, 2025, 06:15:49 PM »
@BehizyTweets

JUST IN: Gavin Newsom has folded to President Trump & will veto a bill that would expand California's sanctuary state law by protecting convicted criminals in CA prisons from deportation.

"The bill would ban CA's prison system from notifying ICE about release dates, wouldn't allow responses to ICE's requests for information, and would restrict any transfers from CA prisons to ICE custody." - Per @BillMelugin_

Newsom knows daddy is home.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
    • View Profile
Dear Me, It’s About to Become More Difficult for Sex Traffickers
« Reply #2358 on: February 17, 2025, 05:47:34 AM »
Let the hand wringing begin:

Trump’s Opening Move Against Migrant Sex Trafficking

MIGRANT GIRLS IN TAPACHULA, MEXICO, AWAIT RESOLUTION AFTER THEIR FAMILIES’ CBP ONE APPOINTMENTS TO TRAVEL TO THE UNITED STATES WERE CANCELED. (JOSE EDUARDO TORRES CANCINO VIA GETTY IMAGES).

“The pervasive fraud in the sponsor process is undeniable,” said the new head of the agency that cares for migrant teens. She’s right.
By Madeleine Rowley


Mellissa Harper, who was installed a few weeks ago as the temporary head of the federal government’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), is wasting no time making important and necessary changes to the agency’s infamous Unaccompanied Alien Children program. On Friday, the agency released new guidance that will make it more difficult for members of transnational criminal organizations and pimps to “sponsor” teenage migrants and then traffic them for sex or labor. The problem grew significantly under the Biden administration, with three times more victims applying for government benefits under the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act during the Biden administration.

The most significant change is that all potential sponsors must be fingerprinted, and the fingerprints must be sent to the FBI to check for criminal records. No child will be released to a sponsor until their fingerprints are recorded in the unaccompanied child’s file. In addition, all identification documents must be legible and unexpired.

Critics of the Trump administration’s immigration policy complain that cumbersome fingerprinting and identification rules could delay the vetting of sponsors, leading to a backlog and overcrowding in shelters that house unaccompanied children. They also fear that under Harper, who has been an official with Immigration and Customs Enforcement since 2007, ORR will share information about the sponsors, most of whom are illegal immigrants themselves, with ICE, making it easier to arrest and deport them. But Harper was unapologetic in an email to the ORR staff. “The pervasive fraud in the sponsor process is undeniable,’ she wrote.

She’s right.

Last October, The Free Press published an exposé about the explosion of labor and sex trafficking by transnational criminal organizations operating in the U.S.—trafficking enabled in no small part by the Biden administration’s open border policies. Gang members and others who were essentially pimps took advantage of the system by claiming to be “sponsors” of unaccompanied teens who were being housed temporarily in shelters run by federally contracted NGOs.

With record numbers of unaccompanied teens crossing the border (over 149,000 in fiscal year 2022 alone), the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) was eager to move them out of the shelters to make room for the next influx—and to do that, they were willing to cut corners at the expense of the migrant children’s safety.

Although regulations promulgated by ORR called for potential sponsors, under certain circumstances, to be fingerprinted, some children were released to sponsors while the results were still pending, as a government watchdog agency reported in February 2024. And potential sponsors, knowing that no one at these NGO shelters was looking too closely, often submitted documents and signatures that were blurry or illegible. In fact, toward the tail end of the Biden administration, the ORR had proposed new regulations that would make fingerprinting and several other provisions meant to safeguard unaccompanied migrants “optional.”

Tara Rodas, a whistleblower who has documented that fraud, told The Free Press, “We can’t continue to prioritize the anonymity of the sponsors over the safety of the children.” Rodas, 56, a federal employee, was shocked by the problems she witnessed while volunteering at an ORR-run shelter for unaccompanied children in 2021. “These new changes are basic, commonsense things and are the bare minimum for a program wrought with fraud.”

According to another whistleblower, Mayra Moreno, 44, who worked as a case manager for a federal contractor in 2021 to help unite unaccompanied children with sponsors, potential sponsors often sent grainy and fraudulent-looking photos of identification documents via WhatsApp as proof of identity. The new system requires potential sponsors to show up in person for their fingerprinting appointment with original, unexpired identification documents in hand.

“There are criticisms that these new rules will discourage sponsors from coming forward to claim unaccompanied children, but frankly, these children might be better off in government custody than with some of these so-called sponsors,” Florida prosecutor Rich Mantei told The Free Press. “I applaud this small step toward making it much safer for these children. It’s good, it’s positive, but it’s not enough, in my opinion.”

https://www.thefp.com/p/trumps-opening-move-against-migrant

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20109
    • View Profile
Re: Dear Me, It’s About to Become More Difficult for Sex Traffickers
« Reply #2359 on: February 17, 2025, 09:59:25 AM »
Cracking down on human sex trafficking, namely horrible crimes against women, it perplexes me that so-called liberals weren't already all over this problem. And now they will predictably show no support for its solution. All because they hate you know who.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
    • View Profile
Re: Dear Me, It’s About to Become More Difficult for Sex Traffickers
« Reply #2360 on: February 17, 2025, 10:05:14 AM »
Cracking down on human sex trafficking, namely horrible crimes against women, it perplexes me that so-called liberals weren't already all over this problem. And now they will predictably show no support for its solution. All because they hate you know who.

Add to that calculation "Progressive" willingness to march hand in hand with regressive Muslim fundamentalists that force women to wear head to toe black frocks--denying them the right to even drive, much less vote--and gleefully torture homosexuals before tossing them off rooftops and you are left unable to take any position they embrace seriously.



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20109
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration; weaponized immigration; deportation
« Reply #2363 on: February 21, 2025, 06:49:13 AM »
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/19/world/americas/us-migrants-panama-jungle-camp.html

"Migrants, Deported to Panama Under Trump Plan, Detained in Remote Jungle Camp"

Is this media or deportation news?

Criminals end up in a prison camp? Instead of running free in a sanctuary City with all expenses paid? Outrageous.

Instapundit: "Passing through the Darien Gap on your way to the U.S. is a human right but passing through the Darien Gap on your way back home is some kind of torture."
« Last Edit: February 21, 2025, 06:53:38 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
FO: deportation strategy
« Reply #2364 on: February 21, 2025, 08:47:01 AM »


(2) TRUMP EO TO BLOCK FED FUNDING FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS: President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing federal agencies to identify all federal programs that provide financial benefits to illegal immigrants, and take action to end those programs.

According to the order, the Trump administration will also ensure that federal funding to state and local governments will not be used to support sanctuary policies or assist illegal immigration.

Why It Matters: Trump will likely use blocks on local and state governments using federal funds for sanctuary policies, in tandem with civil suits and criminal cases from the Justice Department Sanctuary City Working Group, to force sanctuary cities and states to cooperate with immigration enforcement. It is possible the Trump administration is trying to incentivize illegal immigrant self-deportations by impacting state and local benefit programs. - R.C.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
    • View Profile
Homan to MSM: I Don’t Give a Shit About You or Your Hit Pieces
« Reply #2366 on: February 23, 2025, 01:30:25 AM »
@libsoftiktok

Border Czar Tom Homan is an absolute BEAST!

“Look. Let me start off by saying this…if I offend anybody today, I don’t give a shlt.”

“I'm sure the media will write a lot of hit pieces about me tomorrow, I don't give a shlt what you think about me.“

“I worked with 6 presidents, and everyone took steps to secure the border, Joe Biden is the first president who unsecured the border on purpose“

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration; weaponized immigration; deportation
« Reply #2367 on: February 23, 2025, 05:53:05 AM »
Beyond words to communicate how joyous my BP friends are with him!

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20359
    • View Profile
TH
« Reply #2368 on: February 23, 2025, 07:45:23 AM »
yes
and contrast him to Myorkas  -  My God.   Night and day
Good vs Evil

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20359
    • View Profile
military contractrators want contract to enforce immigration
« Reply #2369 on: February 25, 2025, 06:43:05 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
China-to Bermuda-caught-Panama-Turkey
« Reply #2370 on: March 08, 2025, 05:25:15 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
deportation
« Reply #2371 on: March 11, 2025, 06:56:26 PM »
Rosie O'Donnel has self-deported to Ireland.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
Deportation of Mahmoud Khalil- who had Brit security clearance?!?
« Reply #2372 on: March 13, 2025, 07:57:36 AM »



https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4303925/posts


You Know That Hamas-Supporting Student Trump Is Deporting? He Has British Security Clearance !
Hotair ^ | 03/12/2025 | David Strom
Posted on 3/13/2025, 12:20:27 AM by SeekAndFind

WTH, Great Britain?

President Trump is working to deport Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia graduate student who has been an organizer of pro-Hamas rallies and who has been committing crimes, recruiting others to commit crimes, and illegally supporting a terrorist organization as an alien. John has been doing yeoman's work covering this case.

Immigration law is explicit about the last: you may not have, may not now, nor may you at any point as a visa or green card holder support terrorists. It is black letter law.

The Left is going crazy, because, well, the Left. If it is bad, they support it.

But imagine my surprise to learn that he is also associated with British intelligence and their their foreign policy establishment, and has been for years.

So then the question becomes “ why did @10DowningStreet have a MI6 spy in America organizing/leading violent antisemitic riots and destabilizing universities/cities?”

Sounds like they may want Revolutionary War 2.0.— JW (@C130GuyBNA) March 12, 2025

Uh, wut? Say again? He has been key to their "soft power" initiatives, which sure sounds like liaising with terrorists in this case.

The White House triumphally posted Trump's statement and an image of Khalil on X on Monday, accompanied with the words "SHALOM, MAHMOUD" and the accusation that he "led activities aligned to Hamas".

Khalil graduated with a master’s degree from Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs in December.

He was one of the main negotiators for students during the pro-Palestine campus encampment in the spring of 2024.

However, MEE has found that he previously worked as a programme manager at the Syria Office in the British embassy in Beirut from 2018 t0 2022.

Online records reviewed by MEE show that Khalil worked as a local manager for the Syria Chevening Program, a prestigious UK government international scholarship scheme, as well as for the Conflict, Stability, and Security Fund.

'Loved by his colleagues'
Former British diplomat Andrew Waller, who was a policy advisor at the Syria Office while Khalil worked there, told MEE that the US government's depiction of Khalil was false and defamatory.

"He went through a vetting process to get the job and was cleared to work on sensitive issues for the British government," Waller said

"It's outright defamation what Trump has done. Mahmoud is an extremely kind and conscientious person and he was loved by his colleagues at the Syria Office," he added.

Well, then, he MUST be a good guy, even if he is recruiting for US domestic terrorist-supporting organizations. He did outreach in SYRIA, a place filled with the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human beings I've ever known in my life.

For God's sake, Britain, how debased can a country be.

Mahmoud Khalil’s group wants to eradicate Western Civilization & foment unrest in the United States. President Trump & @SecRubio are well within their legal rights to deport this radical. We are either going to stand up or become Europe. I’m 100% behind the President. pic.twitter.com/0shUR407pr— Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) March 11, 2025

Khalil has been shouting to the world that he wants to "eradicate Western Civilization" and that revolutionary violence is the way to do so. He has led occupations of buildings on Columbia's campus, been engaged in what amounts to violence used to deprive others of their civil rights, and preaches support for terrorist violence.

But his colleagues in the British embassy in Syria loved him. His job, supposedly, was to increase Britain's "soft power," and unless that means promoting violence and revolution, he was doing a pretty crappy job of it. It sounds more like he was recruiting terrorists to get student visas to Western countries.

The Brits are so determined to import Muslims who are promoting violence and Sharia law in their own country that Khalil is their idea of an ideal ambassador to the Syrian community. Syria has been in the midst of a horrific civil war, is filled with ISIS and al Qaeda terrorists, and is probably not the best place to be recruiting the "best and the brightest."

The Chevening scholarship, which is funded by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), describes its mission as being to "support UK foreign policy priorities and achieve FCDO objectives by creating lasting positive relationships with future leaders, influencers, and decision-makers".

Waller described it as a "flagship UK soft power policy".

"It brings the brightest students from around the world to UK universities. Mahmoud ran its Syria programme and interviewed hundreds, if not thousands, of applicants on behalf of the British government."

Khalil was also a "local staff political officer", responsible for providing the "contextual understanding and linguistic skills to translate meetings," Waller recalled.

"It's really interesting. Less than two weeks ago JD Vance is lecturing Keir Starmer about free speech, and then the US goes and kidnaps Mahmoud Khalil for organising student protests."

Tricia McLaughlin, spokesperson for the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), told MEE on Monday that Khalil's arrest was "in support of President Trump’s executive orders prohibiting anti-Semitism".

"Khalil led activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organisation."

It's not like it's disputable that Khalil has done these things. It's not a case of mistaken identity. We have video of Khalil calling for "armed resistance" against Western countries, but the Brits just love the guy and complain that he was "kidnapped."

There is a false controversy surrounding the arrest and hopefully deportation of Mahmoud Khalil. I’m going to put it to bed. Khalil’s deportation has nothing to do with your free speech. Khalil is facing deportation because of his conduct, including, allegedly, organizing a… pic.twitter.com/MXFcSuaQlU— Brooke Goldstein (@GoldsteinBrooke) March 12, 2025

There is a false controversy surrounding the arrest and hopefully deportation of Mahmoud Khalil. I’m going to put it to bed.  Khalil’s deportation has nothing to do with your free speech. Khalil is facing deportation because of his conduct, including, allegedly, organizing a violent takeover of US campuses with pro-terror elements, conspiring to commit civil rights violations and trespass, building takeovers — this is criminal activity that endangers public safety, and of course endorsing and espousing terrorist activity in contravention of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

I used to love our friends in the Anglosphere, and still love the IDEA of the Anglosphere and the values that the Scottish Enlightenment spread throughout the world.

Yes. Because nothing says anti-war like chanting for a “global intifada.” https://t.co/Agh4J5zA9P— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) March 12, 2025

But look at what our fellow English speakers have done with themselves. They are destroying freedom, aligning with Islamists who are determined to destroy our societies, and sacrificing their citizens to rape gangs and criminals.

“We’ve tried armed resistance, which is legitimate under international law, but Israel calls it terrorism”
-Mahmoud Khalil

At a session where he indoctrinates students to join the pro terror group CUAD on campus

There shld be no more debate whether Khalil himself supports Hamas pic.twitter.com/EdUd0w7w5L— David lederer (@Davidlederer6) March 11, 2025

If this is what amounts to Britain's "soft power," and this is who they give security clearances to, the UK is farther gone than I imagined.

It's not just the British, though. The entire left-wing establishment and all the prominent Democrats have rushed to defend Khalil and oppose his deportation. It is their cause du jour.

“Let terror-supporting foreign nationals who have violated the terms of their green card stay in the country or you don’t support free speech!”

Nah, bro. We aren’t doing that. Sorry. Accuse us of whatever you want. https://t.co/1HMGqV0IUB— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) March 11, 2025

The Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats are fully embracing him too.

Free Mahmoud Khalil. pic.twitter.com/o9AkeXaYyh— Senate Judiciary Democrats 🇺🇸 (🦋 now on bsky) (@JudiciaryDems) March 10, 2025

Antisemitic much? Anti-American? Anti-Western?

You betcha. That is our transnational elite for you.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20359
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration; weaponized immigration; deportation
« Reply #2373 on: March 13, 2025, 09:05:57 AM »
Khalil's

lawyer was on last night - I don't remember which cable networks as I switch around when I get bored to a different one, and claimed this is a freedom of speech issue and good guy poor Khalil
was no more then a student speaking out and passing out leaflets
like "every other"
college student has done sometime during their education

Funny I don't remember passing out leaflets - lets kill all Palestinians in 1970s, let alone any for any reason.

He is not a good guy.
How about passing out leaflets such as:

Please stop killing Palestanians - by Hamas terrorists.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
Legal basis for deporting Khalil
« Reply #2374 on: March 13, 2025, 01:22:04 PM »


Mike Williams (MARC:   Mike is retired NY PD detective and quite capable of following application of laws with clarity:
=====================


Yesterday at 3:27 AM  ·

Here’s why Mahmoud Khalil will be deported, without a doubt. Bookmark and share this.

 1. Legal permanent residents are still aliens subject to 8 USC 1182 and 8 USC 1227, and thus explicitly deportable for any speech expressing support for designated terrorist organizations or statutorily defined “terrorist activities,” as well as deportable for foreign policy grounds at the sole determination of the Secretary of State and/or AG.

These are not crimes, but they don’t have to be. They are removal grounds under 8 USC 1182 and 8 USC 1227. No criminal conviction is required to remove aliens. IF a crime is committed, it can serve as grounds for removal, but no allegation of criminal misconduct is necessary.

2. ⁠No due process has been denied. He is entitled to a basic statement that he is being detained and subject to removal proceedings, and he got one, and he’s entitled to a removal hearing before being deported, and he’ll get one.

3. ⁠He is not missing. The ICE detention database, available to the public, clearly lists that he is in a detention facility in Louisiana.

4. ⁠These actions are not being done in the name of “Jewish safety.” They are being done on the basis of expressing support for terrorism organizations or activities and on foreign policy grounds which is the prerogative of the Secretary of State and/or AG.

5. ⁠Separately, though no crime of “material” support of terrorism (or any other crime) is legally necessary to deport an alien, his distribution of pamphlets with Hamas iconography and language is “material” support (yes, producing and distributing documents is considered material support — look it up — just like other forms of “material” support like direct financial assistance).

6. ⁠This is an open-and-shut case. At the removal hearing, the government will recite the above, and the judge will affirm that these recitations have been made. On the “foreign policy” grounds of 8 USC 1227 alone, Mahmoud Kahlil is deportable and the government’s declaration that his presence is contrary to foreign policy is non-reviewable. The judge is not entitled to second-guess this; the judge can only require that this invocation be made by the government, and indeed, this invocation will be made.

And to those who think pro-terrorism speech or foreign policy are shaky grounds to deport a green card holder, read this explanation carefully, and bookmark and share it, too:

It is stated clearly at the very beginning of the statute regarding deportability (8 USC 1227, subsection (a)) that “ANY alien (including an alien crewman) in and admitted to the United States shall, upon the order of the Attorney General, be removed if the alien is within one or more of the following classes of deportable aliens:…”

And it then lists these classes / categories:

(a)(1): Inadmissible at time of entry or adjustment of status
(a)(2): Criminal offenses
(a)(3): Failure to register and falsification of documents
(a)(4): Security and related grounds (this includes the direct incorporation by reference of the same “terrorism” grounds of inadmissibility found in 8 USC 1182, including mere expression of support for terrorist organizations or terrorist activities; this also includes “foreign policy” as determined by the Secretary of State)
(a)(5): Public charge
(a)(6): Unlawful voters
Crime (of “moral turpitude” or otherwise), which some commentators are wrongly focusing on, is only ONE category: (a)(2).
But (a)(4) — Security and related grounds — is a separate category. Some people claim that it is vague. It is not. It is actually quite long and detailed.

Some people also seems to think that the speech grounds in (a)(4) (expressing or espousing support for terrorist organizations or terrorist activity) are legally shaky. But they are not!

Why not?

First, the speech grounds are explicitly written into (a)(4)’s “terrorism” provision, with NO exception. Further, when it comes to (a)(4)’s separate “foreign policy” provision, an exception IS written into it (stating that aliens who are candidates for foreign office can’t be deemed inadmissible and deportable under the “foreign policy” provision “SOLELY because of the alien's past, current, or expected beliefs, statements, or associations, if such beliefs, statements, or associations would be lawful within the United States.”)

The explicit inclusion of speech grounds in the “terrorism” provision (with no exception) AND the presence of an exception relating to speech ONLY in the “foreign policy” provision, (but NOT in the “terrorism” provision, and only for aliens who foreign government officials or candidates) shows clear congressional intent to REQUIRE the executive branch to deport ANY aliens based on pro-terrorism speech even if it would be legal for citizens/nationals, and to only require more than that when the “foreign policy” (not “terrorism”) provision is invoked AND the alien is running for office or already an official of a foreign government.

But there’s more!

The statute regarding deportability (8 USC 1227) includes an additional “waiver of grounds for deportation” subsection applying to certain parts of the “inadmissibility at time of adjustment of status” and “failure to register - change of address” provisions of 8 USC 1227 (i.e., 8 USC 1227(a)(1)-(D) and (a)(3). This separate waiver subsection, subsection c (i.e., 8 USC 1227(c)) provides for specific situations when the AG can waive deportability and allow a person to stay. But it only applies to “special immigrants,” which is very rare and not in play here.

(Even if Khalil indeed were a “special immigrant” this separate waiver subsection not only does NOT include a waiver for ANY part of the terrorism and foreign policy grounds, but rather, it explicitly carves them out (!) by stating “Paragraphs (1)(A), (1)(B), (1)(C), (1)(D), and (3)(A) of subsection (a) (OTHER THAN so much of paragraph (1) as relates to a ground of inadmissibility described in paragraph…(3) of section 1182(a) …” shall not apply to a special immigrant described in section 1101(a)(27)(J) of this title based upon circumstances that existed before the date the alien was provided such special immigrant status.”)

Khalil will be deported.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
And just who is Khalil?
« Reply #2375 on: March 13, 2025, 02:55:39 PM »
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4303925/posts

You Know That Hamas-Supporting Student Trump Is Deporting? He Has British Security Clearance !
Hotair ^ | 03/12/2025 | David Strom
Posted on 3/13/2025, 12:20:27 AM by SeekAndFind

WTH, Great Britain?

President Trump is working to deport Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia graduate student who has been an organizer of pro-Hamas rallies and who has been committing crimes, recruiting others to commit crimes, and illegally supporting a terrorist organization as an alien. John has been doing yeoman's work covering this case.

Immigration law is explicit about the last: you may not have, may not now, nor may you at any point as a visa or green card holder support terrorists. It is black letter law.

The Left is going crazy, because, well, the Left. If it is bad, they support it.

But imagine my surprise to learn that he is also associated with British intelligence and their their foreign policy establishment, and has been for years.

So then the question becomes “ why did @10DowningStreet have a MI6 spy in America organizing/leading violent antisemitic riots and destabilizing universities/cities?”

Sounds like they may want Revolutionary War 2.0.— JW (@C130GuyBNA) March 12, 2025

Uh, wut? Say again? He has been key to their "soft power" initiatives, which sure sounds like liaising with terrorists in this case.

The White House triumphally posted Trump's statement and an image of Khalil on X on Monday, accompanied with the words "SHALOM, MAHMOUD" and the accusation that he "led activities aligned to Hamas".

Khalil graduated with a master’s degree from Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs in December.

He was one of the main negotiators for students during the pro-Palestine campus encampment in the spring of 2024.

However, MEE has found that he previously worked as a programme manager at the Syria Office in the British embassy in Beirut from 2018 t0 2022.

Online records reviewed by MEE show that Khalil worked as a local manager for the Syria Chevening Program, a prestigious UK government international scholarship scheme, as well as for the Conflict, Stability, and Security Fund.

'Loved by his colleagues'
Former British diplomat Andrew Waller, who was a policy advisor at the Syria Office while Khalil worked there, told MEE that the US government's depiction of Khalil was false and defamatory.

"He went through a vetting process to get the job and was cleared to work on sensitive issues for the British government," Waller said

"It's outright defamation what Trump has done. Mahmoud is an extremely kind and conscientious person and he was loved by his colleagues at the Syria Office," he added.

Well, then, he MUST be a good guy, even if he is recruiting for US domestic terrorist-supporting organizations. He did outreach in SYRIA, a place filled with the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human beings I've ever known in my life.

For God's sake, Britain, how debased can a country be.

Mahmoud Khalil’s group wants to eradicate Western Civilization & foment unrest in the United States. President Trump & @SecRubio are well within their legal rights to deport this radical. We are either going to stand up or become Europe. I’m 100% behind the President. pic.twitter.com/0shUR407pr— Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) March 11, 2025

Khalil has been shouting to the world that he wants to "eradicate Western Civilization" and that revolutionary violence is the way to do so. He has led occupations of buildings on Columbia's campus, been engaged in what amounts to violence used to deprive others of their civil rights, and preaches support for terrorist violence.

But his colleagues in the British embassy in Syria loved him. His job, supposedly, was to increase Britain's "soft power," and unless that means promoting violence and revolution, he was doing a pretty crappy job of it. It sounds more like he was recruiting terrorists to get student visas to Western countries.

The Brits are so determined to import Muslims who are promoting violence and Sharia law in their own country that Khalil is their idea of an ideal ambassador to the Syrian community. Syria has been in the midst of a horrific civil war, is filled with ISIS and al Qaeda terrorists, and is probably not the best place to be recruiting the "best and the brightest."

The Chevening scholarship, which is funded by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), describes its mission as being to "support UK foreign policy priorities and achieve FCDO objectives by creating lasting positive relationships with future leaders, influencers, and decision-makers".

Waller described it as a "flagship UK soft power policy".

"It brings the brightest students from around the world to UK universities. Mahmoud ran its Syria programme and interviewed hundreds, if not thousands, of applicants on behalf of the British government."

Khalil was also a "local staff political officer", responsible for providing the "contextual understanding and linguistic skills to translate meetings," Waller recalled.

"It's really interesting. Less than two weeks ago JD Vance is lecturing Keir Starmer about free speech, and then the US goes and kidnaps Mahmoud Khalil for organising student protests."

Tricia McLaughlin, spokesperson for the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), told MEE on Monday that Khalil's arrest was "in support of President Trump’s executive orders prohibiting anti-Semitism".

"Khalil led activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organisation."

It's not like it's disputable that Khalil has done these things. It's not a case of mistaken identity. We have video of Khalil calling for "armed resistance" against Western countries, but the Brits just love the guy and complain that he was "kidnapped."

There is a false controversy surrounding the arrest and hopefully deportation of Mahmoud Khalil. I’m going to put it to bed. Khalil’s deportation has nothing to do with your free speech. Khalil is facing deportation because of his conduct, including, allegedly, organizing a… pic.twitter.com/MXFcSuaQlU— Brooke Goldstein (@GoldsteinBrooke) March 12, 2025

There is a false controversy surrounding the arrest and hopefully deportation of Mahmoud Khalil. I’m going to put it to bed.  Khalil’s deportation has nothing to do with your free speech. Khalil is facing deportation because of his conduct, including, allegedly, organizing a violent takeover of US campuses with pro-terror elements, conspiring to commit civil rights violations and trespass, building takeovers — this is criminal activity that endangers public safety, and of course endorsing and espousing terrorist activity in contravention of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

I used to love our friends in the Anglosphere, and still love the IDEA of the Anglosphere and the values that the Scottish Enlightenment spread throughout the world.

Yes. Because nothing says anti-war like chanting for a “global intifada.” https://t.co/Agh4J5zA9P— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) March 12, 2025

But look at what our fellow English speakers have done with themselves. They are destroying freedom, aligning with Islamists who are determined to destroy our societies, and sacrificing their citizens to rape gangs and criminals.

“We’ve tried armed resistance, which is legitimate under international law, but Israel calls it terrorism”
-Mahmoud Khalil

At a session where he indoctrinates students to join the pro terror group CUAD on campus

There shld be no more debate whether Khalil himself supports Hamas pic.twitter.com/EdUd0w7w5L— David lederer (@Davidlederer6) March 11, 2025

If this is what amounts to Britain's "soft power," and this is who they give security clearances to, the UK is farther gone than I imagined.

It's not just the British, though. The entire left-wing establishment and all the prominent Democrats have rushed to defend Khalil and oppose his deportation. It is their cause du jour.

“Let terror-supporting foreign nationals who have violated the terms of their green card stay in the country or you don’t support free speech!”

Nah, bro. We aren’t doing that. Sorry. Accuse us of whatever you want. https://t.co/1HMGqV0IUB— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) March 11, 2025

The Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats are fully embracing him too.

Free Mahmoud Khalil. pic.twitter.com/o9AkeXaYyh— Senate Judiciary Democrats 🇺🇸 (🦋 now on bsky) (@JudiciaryDems) March 10, 2025

Antisemitic much? Anti-American? Anti-Western?

You betcha. That is our transnational elite for you.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
FO: Enemy Aliens Act
« Reply #2376 on: March 14, 2025, 06:39:29 PM »
(3) TRUMP TO INVOKE ENEMY ALIENS ACT: A U.S. official said President Donald Trump is planning to invoke the 1798 Enemy Aliens Act as soon as today. The official said the Trump administration hopes invoking the act will unlock broad powers to arrest and deport illegal immigrants while bypassing immigration courts.

(4) FEMA PROBES AID ORGS FOR ILLEGAL ALIEN SMUGGLING: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) said it is investigating organizations that received grants through FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program to provide temporary housing and aid to illegal immigrants. FEMA Acting Director Cameron Hamilton said the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is concerned the federal money was used for illegal activities, and the organizations may have violated federal laws against smuggling or transporting illegal immigrants.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20359
    • View Profile
student visa
« Reply #2378 on: March 15, 2025, 09:32:38 AM »
VDH had good podcase describing Khalil who has green card and quickly married an American like many of the those coming here do to get anchor spouse came on a student visa , but that does not mean he still cannot be thrown out.

He is NOT a citizen.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/trolling-politics-trump-and-the-art-of-provocation/id1570380458?i=1000699161107

I love his podcasts .  So logical and he has that deep relaxed tone and voice and such a pleasure to listen to him.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
Megyn Kelly on Khalil
« Reply #2379 on: March 15, 2025, 06:38:46 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20359
    • View Profile
some RI doctor deported back to Lebanon
« Reply #2380 on: March 16, 2025, 10:34:07 PM »
https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/local/communities/2025/03/16/rasha-alawieh-deported-ohio-state-lebanon/82468566007/

Waiting to hear the reason .  Probably works with Hezbellah or Hamas.

of course the usual DEIs and she herself come out and say she has no clue why.
Must be some mistake or xenophobia etc
we will find out the truth soon enough

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20359
    • View Profile
yup Hezbollah ties
« Reply #2381 on: March 17, 2025, 08:28:46 AM »




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 20359
    • View Profile
Trump directs DOJ to investigate immigration lawyers
« Reply #2385 on: March 23, 2025, 09:20:24 AM »
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/03/23/trump-directs-doj-to-seek-sanctions-against-immigration-lawyers-who-game-courts-migration-laws/

seems like a good idea though I don't know the details.

I cannot find the actual memorandum online.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 74353
    • View Profile
FO: CA resistance to deportation increases
« Reply #2387 on: March 28, 2025, 08:34:47 AM »


(6) CA SANCTUARY CITIES PLANNING RESURGENCE: The Los Angeles, CA City Council voted Wednesday to provide money and resources to help safeguard illegal immigrants against ICE raids, and asked state law makers to increase state funds for deportation defense.
The LA City Council also launched an initiative to monitor and track ICE activities in the city, and a “Know Your Rights” information campaign to inform immigrants about legal protections.
The San Diego County Board of Supervisors is expected to return to a Democrat majority after a special election next month, and implement further sanctuary city policies.
Why It Matters: Local and some state level Democrats are resisting the national level Democratic sentiment to move the Democratic Party toward the center. Local and state Democrats renewing a push for sanctuary policies are likely emboldened by low level federal courts delaying the Trump administration with temporary restraining orders and injunctions, expecting the courts will also side with local and state officials in any legal action taken by the Trump Department of Justice. - R.C.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
    • View Profile
The Founder’s Understanding of Citizenship
« Reply #2388 on: March 29, 2025, 08:51:44 AM »
The Founders based citizenship on choices made rather than birth geography, and viewed the issue through a moral lens:

The moral background of American citizenship.
Jeremiah Gridley, leader of the Massachusetts bar when John Adams joined it, said that “a Lawyer ought never to be without a Book of Moral Philosophy on his Table.” In the founding era, moral philosophy was itself part of common law reasoning, as was political philosophy.

This sets the Founders apart not only from the modern academy, with its separate departments for government, philosophy, and law, but even from their British contemporaries of the late 18th century such as the jurist William Blackstone. As James Wilson noted of Blackstone, “He should be read and studied. He deserves to be much admired; but he ought not to be implicitly followed.”

Contra Blackstone, the Founders maintained that if one does not think about common law precedents in particular, and legal reasoning in general, in light of the moral/legal reasoning behind them, one will misread them. The reasoning that justified them was inseparable from the law itself, and informed the scope and limitations of any precedent that followed.

Recall Alexander Hamilton’s comment in his discussion of the constitutionality of the Bank of the United States: he claimed “a right to employ all the means requisite and fairly applicable to the attainment of the ends of such power, and which are not precluded by restrictions and exceptions specified in the Constitution, or not immoral, or not contrary to the essential ends of political society.” A Hamiltonian reading of the Constitution considers both morality and the essential ends of political society. Hamilton was no outlier in that regard.

This, I believe, is where the estimable Professor John Yoo goes wrong in claiming that “the practice and understanding of citizenship in the antebellum era was one of jus soli”—that is, “the law of the soil.” Professor Yoo argues that the Founders inherited a principle which conferred citizenship on all those born within a given geographical territory, and that we should assume this principle remained in place since the Founders never expressly rejected it. Reading according to the moral logic of the law, however, we find that jus soli was in fact not the prevailing logic of citizenship law, and that the true prevailing logic—allegiance to the king—was explicitly rejected.

Indeed, the term jus soli is completely absent from Blackstone’s Commentaries, from “Calvin’s Case” (the landmark ruling that made English subjects of children born in Scotland after the King of Scotland assumed the title of the King of England, even though the two nations remained separate kingdoms), and from all the writings of Edward Coke I have been able to search thus far. “Calvin’s Case” was not about jus soli, or the obligations and rights conferred by the physical location of one’s birth. That physical location was only important insofar as it established the real core principle: an obligation of personal allegiance to the King. Calvin’s allegiance was to James Stuart, the man who was simultaneously King of England and King of Scotland.

The Founders rejected that conception of allegiance and understood citizenship instead as arising from the new principle of consent. New members of the body politic are made by consent. Hence it is simply incorrect to say that the American Revolution did not change this area of law. It was in essence a transformation of the law’s underlying logic. The Revolution put consent and the rights of men in the place that fealty to the King and the common law occupied in English law. That’s what it means to say that consent is central to understanding the Citizenship Clause. It’s the principle at the heart of the matter and, therefore, essential to understanding the limitations of the general rule that children born on U.S. soil and children born to current citizens are citizens of the U.S. Attending to such principles is essential if one is to consider the essential ends of political society as Americans qua Americans understand them.

The question at hand is whether we also make changes to other areas of the law of allegiance, notably who is a U.S. national by birth. What does it mean to say that consent is the central principle of citizenship, and what does it mean to say the American Revolution changed the way we understand who is a member of the community at birth? By Professor Yoo’s own admission, these sorts of questions constitute an understudied area of legal history. Hence it is not fitting to assert that it is perfectly clear that jus soli remained in place between 1776 and the creation of the 14th Amendment, or that “If the Claremont view is right, we should see historical evidence of the states rejecting the common law rule in the years after the Constitution’s ratification.” By Professor Yoo’s own admission, we do not have sufficient evidence yet to claim certainty. Many questions remain unanswered.

For instance: on the principle of consent, is it reasonable to say that giving a woman a tourist visa should be understood as an implicit offer of citizenship to any child born to that woman while visiting the U.S.? That sort of deliberation is itself part of legal reasoning, or, at least, it was in the Founding era, and in the era in which the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified. How far should that reasoning extend? Would it extend to student visas and other temporary visas short of permanent residence?

In a law review article that just was released, Kurt Lash finds mixed evidence: “Granting citizenship to children born to temporarily present non-citizen parents seems to be the best application of the Citizenship Clause, even if not clearly required by the original understanding. In the end, both constructions are textually and historically plausible.”

In other words, it’s debatable how far the line demarcating citizens from non-citizens extends. That’s one of the questions that Trump’s executive order on the subject raises. Perhaps in typical Trumpian manner, the EO goes too far and will, perversely, get in the way of the Supreme Court allowing any limitation. A little more prudence by President Trump might produce better results.

But in the case of tourists, and perhaps others who are here on a short term basis and who are, per tax treaties, not subject to our jurisdiction with regard to taxation of income, the issue becomes very different. The first sentence of the 14th Amendment states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Implicitly, this assumes that the amendment applies only to those who “reside” in a state—not those who are merely visiting. (Legal theorist Andrew Hyman’s article on this suggest that the language was quite intentional.)

As it is the normal and natural way of humans to pair up and have children, and as those children tend to have the same nationality as their parents, the legal assumption is that their nationality follows. That’s what the Founders established quite clearly in the law of the states after the Revolution and in the Naturalization Act of 1790. The latter specifically called those children born to American citizens, in whatever locale, “natural born” citizens—reasoning not from the location of birth or from their obligation to a monarch but from the chain of consent embodied in their parents. Hence they were changing the underlying principle which was itself part of the law, as they themselves understood the law.

On the other hand, it is also standard for the children of those who are living full time in a community to be citizens of that community. That’s why the simplistic “soil or blood” formulation is a distraction. Professor Yoo asserted that the standard principle was that of soil, and the Founders were merely adding the principle of blood by adding the children born to current citizens. But as far as I can tell, this is nothing more than a conjecture, without proof texts to support it.

Principles in Action

The law of press freedom in the Founding era may serve as a useful analogue for how the states might have treated citizenship law. The Federalist Party read the First Amendment as continuing the colonial common law understanding of freedom of the press, according to which the government was only withheld from exerting restraint on the press prior to publication, not from censoring illicit or seditious materials already in circulation. Freedom of the press in common law was perfectly compatible with prosecution for seditious libel, and in English common law a statement could be judged seditious libel even if it were true.

However, in the common law of the colony of New York (but not in the common laws of the other colonies) true material could not be censored as seditious libel. Only when the matter became a contested issue at the national level did the courts draw out the implications of the Revolution for the common law standard. After the Sedition Act expired in early 1801, we have had a very strong taboo against charges of seditious libel in general, and we have generally rejected the common law understanding of press freedom meaning no prior restraint.

One could easily see an analogy here with marginal questions of citizenship, such as the nationality of someone born to a mother who is temporarily in the U.S. when she gives birth. It is only when the people are forced to think through the underlying principle that we finally “liquidate” (to use Madison’s term) the meaning of our constitutional text.

For this reason, I am curious why Professor Yoo believes that if we read the first sentence of the 14th Amendment as excluding tourists and others not here on a permanent basis, we would be narrowing the existing rule in the U.S. For the most part this seems like an issue that has yet to be adjudicated. The few cases mentioned on the subject, are insufficient to establish a general rule.

Professor Yoo also does not cite evidence for his assertion that it would be strange to expand citizenship at birth to the children of freemen, but to narrow it in other ways at the same time. “Why would the 14th Amendment’s Framers narrow the definition of citizenship for everyone else?” he asks. Even on Yoo’s theory, the definition would not be narrowed for “everyone else,” but only for those few to whom the edge cases apply. And unless we assume a Whiggish idea of history as progressing always from less citizenship to more, we can make no assumption that the 14th Amendment must move exclusively in that direction. Instead we should assume that the framers of the Amendment were teasing out the implications of the new principle—consent, not kingship—established at the Founding.

That the principled basis of citizenship is under threat is clear. In a dispute known as the “Bitcoin Jesus” case, the U.S. is arguing against the claim “that expatriation is a fundamental constitutional right,” because it is not enumerated in the Constitution. But that’s because it’s a fundamental right beyond the Constitution. It’s connected to the principles upon which our regime rests, inseparable from the principles that justified legitimizing our Constitution via ratification by the people. When lawyers are trained not to recognize the connection between the principles upon which the Constitution rests and constitutional reasoning, such anti-American (and ante-American) conclusions follow.

A better way of reading the 14th Amendment is to note that it represented a nationalization of what had been local practices. Consider that in Massachusetts, local residence, and the obligation that came with it for a locality to ensure the well-being of a resident, was an important part of citizenship. The laws were clear about who was a resident: “neither legitimate nor illegitimate children shall gain a settlement by birth in the place where they may be born, if neither of their parents then has a settlement therein.” Why would it be unreasonable for senators, Congressmen, and state legislators proposing and ratifying the Amendment to have that element of the rights of citizenship in mind? Otherwise they might have inadvertently changed local law when they intended to codify it. What formerly had been local matters were being made national ones through the amendment process.

If our Courts still followed common law reasoning in the old sense, that element of New England law might have interesting implications. It might imply that after a certain number of years one can argue that people here illegally have a residence by a kind of adverse possession. That was the law in Massachusetts. It was a form of implicit consent to residence rights: the locals have implicitly allowed the new arrival to join their community. That form of consent, based on longstanding practice, was commonly described by the colonists in their accounts of the scope and limitations of Parliament’s authority over the empire. It’s perfectly intelligible, provided one understands law the way Adams and the other Founders were trained to understand law.

One final point, which few others have raised: why is there no analogy between Indians not taxed and illegal immigrants? There was no category of illegal immigration when the 14th Amendment was passed. There was no limitation on how many people could join the U.S. each year. Native Americans were a separate category. When they moved off Indian lands, they were in a situation more like today’s illegal immigrants than any other group I can think of. And, like the Indians, they are “not taxed,” unless they pay income taxes illegally, via a fake Social Security number or other like fraud. I wonder if that same logic would apply to counting illegal residents for apportionment. But that’s another essay.

In sum, I suspect Professor Yoo is thinking like a law professor more than a Founding or Civil War era lawyer in his reading of the first sentence of the 14th Amendment. The Court that gave us Plessy v. Ferguson might not be the most reliable guide on questions of citizenship. It would be better to reason about our laws the way the Founders did, before law began to take a more modern turn.


Richard Samuelson is Associate Professor of Government in Hillsdale College’s Van Andel Graduate School of Statesmanship.

https://americanmind.org/features/the-case-against-birthright-citizenship-2/citizens-not-serfs/