Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, August 16, 2025

"I just sent Sanctuary City letters to 32 mayors around the country and multiple governors saying, you better be abiding by our federal policies and with our federal law enforcement, because if you aren't, we're going to come after you,"

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Trump says his takeover of policing in D.C., will hopefully be enacted in other major cities, including NYC, LA and Chicago. All the cities on his target list are led by Black mayors, and most have "sanctuary" policies limiting local cooperation with ICE.

[image or embed]

-- Truthout (@truthout.org) Aug 15, 2025 at 3:45 PM

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

The dogs don't shoot themselves. Everybody has to help.

#1 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-08-15 05:17 PM | Reply

I thought Republicans believed in Limited Government and local control.

Why is the Fed asserting itself like this?

Why can't cities abd states decide for themselves about services for undocumented people?

Why can't cities and states have their own standards?

Local control...I thought Republicans loved that.

What happened?

#2 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-08-15 05:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

We don't recognize the authority of Pedo Donnie and his paid whore.

#3 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-08-15 05:47 PM | Reply

What is a Sanctuary City?

A sanctuary city is a city, county, or state that limits its cooperation with federal immigration authorities, often by refusing to detain individuals solely based on their immigration status or by declining to share information with immigration officials about an individual's status.

In practice this means that if you witness a crime and call 911 OR are the victim of a crime and call 911 OR have a medical emergency and call 911, the responding police, EMTs or firefighters will NOT detain you and will NOT notify ICE of your existence.

Reseach shows that sanctuary cities correlate to less crime as victims and witnesses of crime are less likely to avoid notifying the police, like say a domestic violence situation or a mugging. More notice to the police results in fewer criminals on the streets committing crimes. The opposite, of course, means a non-sanctuary city will have higher crime rates due to a fearful communuity.

Just, yet another example of magat scum actually supporting crime.

#4 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-08-15 05:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

i.ytimg.com

#5 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-08-15 05:53 PM | Reply

"Stupid Sanctuary Cities!"

#6 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-08-15 05:54 PM | Reply

I thought Republicans believed in Limited Government and local control.

Why is the Fed asserting itself like this?

#2 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-08-15 05:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

I know, right. Why even have an FBI or DOJ? Hell, why even have immigration department? Cities should have the right to do what ever they want.

#7 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-08-15 06:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

So, Bondi outs herself as wholly ignorant of the "anti-commandeering doctrine" established by the Supreme Court. The doctrine basically says the feds can't compel states and cities to enforce federal law or policy. www.law.cornell.edu

A couple of recent examples involving sanctuary cities.

reason.com

reason.com

#8 | Posted by et_al at 2025-08-15 06:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

"we're going to come after you,"

First they came for the sanctuary cities.

Republicans high fived and shotgunned a beer.

#9 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-15 07:41 PM | Reply

First they came for the sanctuary cities.

Republicans high fived and shotgunned a beer.

#9 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2025-08-15 07:41 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

First they came for the degenerates. You were one of them.

#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-08-15 10:12 PM | Reply

You're not gay. You'd ---- a snake if someone held it for you. Just like Clownshack. You re both sick.

#11 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-08-15 10:14 PM | Reply

------ sicko

#12 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-08-15 10:18 PM | Reply

First they came for the degenerates. You were one of them.
#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds

It's refreshing to see your true Nazi colors.

#13 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-15 11:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Turdfyck is really having a bad week. Bwahaha.

#14 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-08-15 11:10 PM | Reply

know, right. Why even have an FBI or DOJ?

Yall were fine with getting rid of them when they did their jobs investigating Trump.

You're just authoritarian s%^*bags who live big, intrusive government when they're punishing people you've been taught to hate.

#15 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-16 10:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

First they came for the degenerates. You were one of them.

#10 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Says the guy who sees anonymous truck stop sex behind every door ...

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-16 10:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2


It's refreshing to see your true Nazi colors.
#13 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

This is the sign that Snoofy is out of ideas and arguments, takes Godwin's law to new levels.

He claims to like Democracy, Freedom, but loves Hamas and theocracy.
He claims to dislike crime. But wants minorities in a city to live with crime worse than Fallujah.
He claims to want to help "illegal immigrants". But wants them to earn slave wages.

He's so full of contradictions, he run out of ideas. He wants nothing good for Americans, just call anyone that wants a better America a Nazi.

Thats his game.

#17 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-16 11:05 AM | Reply

No, your game is to present strawmen as fact.

Because you're a disingenuous turd.

Now f*^% off.

#18 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-16 11:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

... just call anyone that wants a better (more whiter) America a Nazi.

Umm ok foreign agitator.

Thx for the advice.

#19 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-08-16 11:24 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Says the guy who sees anonymous truck stop sex behind every door ...

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-16 10:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

Says the guy who woke up with a salty taste after a frat party...

#20 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-08-16 09:48 PM | Reply

Description

#21 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 03:03 AM | Reply

Lftnthrds is also a pedo defender

#22 | Posted by hamburglar at 2025-08-17 04:10 AM | Reply

Lftnthrds is also a pedo defender
#22 | Posted by hamburglar

Lftnthrds is a pedo supporter.

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-17 01:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Most Republicans still support Trump, even if his name is in the Epstein Files.

The other Republicans will fall in line, because to be a Republican is to make yourself a Beta to an Alpha Leader like Trump.

#24 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-17 01:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The only thing preventing Turds from raping children is he can't fit through the doors of his trailer to outside.

Fat boy needs a diet.

#25 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 01:16 PM | Reply

There should be accountability for future victims of the retained illegal criminals. Civil accountability for the victims and criminal accountability for the seditious officials who facilitated the unlawful release.

#26 | Posted by easy_meat at 2025-08-17 03:40 PM | Reply

I guess she can do anything but release the Epstein files.

#27 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 03:43 PM | Reply

February 2025, Bondi stated on Fox News that Epstein's client list was "sitting on my desk right now to review,"

#28 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 03:43 PM | Reply

Republicans love pedophilia.

#29 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 03:44 PM | Reply

#26 | POSTED BY EASY_MEAT

Ridiculous, Snoofy voted for the killings, rapes and child traffiking. Their just doing what Snoofy wanted.

#30 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 03:47 PM | Reply

IAMRUNT voted for the------------ who killed 1.2 million Americans.

#31 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2025-08-17 03:49 PM | Reply

The opposite, of course, means a non-sanctuary city will have higher crime rates due to a fearful communuity.(sic)

#4 | Posted by truthhurts

Please provide an example of a normal ('non-sanctuary') city with a higher crime rate than the usual-suspect run scofflaw 'sanctuary' cities.

#32 | Posted by easy_meat at 2025-08-17 04:35 PM | Reply

"Numerous non-sanctuary cities in the United States have higher crime rates than some sanctuary cities.

For instance, studies show that San Francisco, a known sanctuary city, has a considerably lower murder rate than comparable non-sanctuary cities like Dallas and Indianapolis. Data from 2024 indicates San Francisco recorded 35 murders, while Dallas and Indianapolis reported 183 and 173 murders respectively."

'Easy Meat', indeed.

#33 | Posted by Corky at 2025-08-17 04:41 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Please provide an example of a normal ('non-sanctuary') city with a higher crime rate than the usual-suspect run scofflaw 'sanctuary' cities.
#32 | Posted by easy_meat

Here is a clear example of a "normal" (non-sanctuary) city with a higher crime rate than some commonly cited "sanctuary" cities:

- Memphis, Tennessee is not designated as a sanctuary city and had the highest violent crime rate among large U.S. cities for 2024-2025, with 2,501.3 violent crimes per 100,000 residents and a total crime rate of 9,400.3 per 100,000.[1]

For comparison, several major "sanctuary" cities"such as San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, and New York City"have notably lower crime rates:
- San Francisco, CA (sanctuary city): 4,525.6 total crimes/100,000; 596.5 violent crimes/100,000
- Seattle, WA (sanctuary city): 5,782.7 total crimes/100,000; 775.1 violent crimes/100,000
- New York City, NY (sanctuary city): 3,039.3 total crimes/100,000; 671.0 violent crimes/100,000[2][3][1]

This demonstrates that non-sanctuary cities like Memphis can, and sometimes do, have higher crime rates than "sanctuary" cities traditionally criticized for being soft on crime.[1]

[1] www.security.org
[2] www.justice.gov
[3] cis.org
[4] www.justice.gov
[5] www.ilrc.org
[6] www.naco.org
[7] ballotpedia.org
[8] www.arcadian.ai
[9] apnews.com
[10] en.wikipedia.org

#34 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 04:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Leftist Logic:

-If a random low-tier leftist federal judge strikes down a state law, that's good
-If a random leftist city or state official defies a federal law, that's good

This isn't about traditionally legislated laws at any level, is it?
It's about leftist ascendancy , leftist tyranny.
Leftists will ultimately support mass extinction of ideological dissent, just as their model Bolshevik leftists did in Russia. I can see from some of the posts on this leftist blog that some of you are already there.

#35 | Posted by easy_meat at 2025-08-17 04:48 PM | Reply

#35 | Posted by easy_meat

So you're just going to ignore the fact you got swatted down like a diseased mosquito?

That's a good little cultist.

#36 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 04:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- leftist tyranny.

I understand that even his Mom points and laughs at him.

Trump is a totalitarian, and were Hitler and Stalin; the right or left paradigm isn't particularly useful.

#37 | Posted by Corky at 2025-08-17 04:51 PM | Reply

"leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" "leftist" !

Arrhhsgh bubbllleea blubabe...

Drooling idiot - you are now plonked.

#38 | Posted by YAV at 2025-08-17 04:52 PM | Reply

as were

#39 | Posted by Corky at 2025-08-17 04:52 PM | Reply

#34 | Posted by rstybeach11

Oh, Memphis. Of course, the bastion of law and order...
?Thanks for the example!

It's amazing really. Things are worse in Memphis than ever before under years and years of democratic leadership and nobody seems to care.

#40 | Posted by easy_meat at 2025-08-17 04:52 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Stupid leftists!"

#41 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-08-17 04:53 PM | Reply

#40 | Posted by easy_meat

Cry harder. You asked for an example, you were given three, you silly cultist!

#42 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 04:54 PM | Reply

Cultism is for kids! Or mental midgets.

#43 | Posted by Corky at 2025-08-17 04:56 PM | Reply

- San Francisco, CA (sanctuary city): 4,525.6 total crimes/100,000; 596.5 violent crimes/100,000
- Seattle, WA (sanctuary city): 5,782.7 total crimes/100,000; 775.1 violent crimes/100,000
- New York City, NY (sanctuary city): 3,039.3 total crimes/100,000; 671.0 violent crimes/100,000[2][3][1]

Where does Memphis rank in crime?
Cities with highest violent crime rates (per 100,000), 2024
Rank City Violent crime rate per 100,000
1 Memphis, Tennessee 2,501.3
2 Detroit, Michigan 1,781.3
3 Baltimore, Maryland 1,606.2
4 Houston, Texas 1,148.2

Trends in reported violent crime. In 2023, 374 violent crime incidents per 100,000 residents were reported to police in the United States.

-It would seem that 'sanctuary city' status is secondary to 'democrat ruled' in terms of violent crime.

#44 | Posted by easy_meat at 2025-08-17 05:00 PM | Reply

Daddysfist, your child-raping hero offed 1.2 million Americans.

#45 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2025-08-17 05:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#44 | Posted by easy_meat

Violent crime rates are influenced by many complex factors: poverty, local policing, drug epidemics, education, historic trends, and economic conditions. Political leadership (Democrat or Republican) and "sanctuary" status are only two of many variables, and crime statistics do not show a consistent, direct relationship with either. The largest U.S. cities (regardless of crime level) tend to be run by Democrats simply because Democrats generally dominate urban areas. There are Democrat-led cities with both high and low crime rates, and the same is true for Republican-led cities.

So blaming high crime solely on Democratic governance, or linking it directly to sanctuary status, is an oversimplification unsupported by the broader data, which you obviously ignore, cultist!

The comparison was meant to show that "sanctuary city" status alone doesn't make a city more or less dangerous. Memphis, a non-sanctuary city, has the highest violent crime rate in the nation, whereas big sanctuary cities like San Francisco, Seattle, and New York actually have much lower rates, even below the national average in some years. Crime rates are shaped by a wide variety of social and economic factors, not just immigration policies or political leadership, and the data simply doesn't support your cultist suggestion that sanctuary or Democrat-led cities are inherently more dangerous.

Swallow it.

#46 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 05:05 PM | Reply

Description

It's a little more complicated than some cultists would like to acknowledge.

#47 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 05:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Violent crime is a boogeyman of Small Minds.

It's an EXCUSE to take real freedoms from ordinary people in the name of Law and order.

Which is worse, a few muggings, or the lockdown of the entire country by masked thugs who hide behind the "law"?

Mugging were rare in Nazi Germany,I'd still prefer the crime stats of Memphis to the "security" of the Gestapo or SS.

---- TRUMP,I HOPE THAT ----- CHOKES ON HIS OWN VOMIT IN PUBLIC.

#48 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-08-17 05:15 PM | Reply

Description

#49 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 05:28 PM | Reply

" The doctrine basically says the feds can't compel states and cities to enforce federal law or policy. www.law.cornell.edu"

Yes, however the doctrine does not empower cities to obstruct the enforcement of federal law.

#50 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-08-17 06:03 PM | Reply

Stop all the distractions and release the Epstein files.

Trumpers are so xenophobic they'll support a pedophile in order to silence the voices in their head.

#51 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 06:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

February 2025, Bondi stated on Fox News that Epstein's client list was "sitting on my desk right now to review,"

Meanwhile, Trump supporters, "I'm scared of people whose crimes are statistically insignificant and whose contributions to this nation have been proven beneficial."

You're nothing but scared stupid idiots and Trump is using your blind hate to destroy this nation.

#52 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 06:10 PM | Reply

#50 - Do you understand the division and what the various Feds are allowed to do by law?
Where's your outrage for Federal overreach? You wouldn't shut up about it under any "D" president.
You were non-stop and nothing was done that even begins to approach what Trump's done.
No one is obstructing, so thanks again for another one of your strawman garbage insinuations and attempted deflections.

#53 | Posted by YAV at 2025-08-17 06:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

POSTED BY EASY_MEAT

Looks like ScottS has found himself a new username.

#54 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 06:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

President Pedo's doing all he can to distract from being a pedophile and the evidence in those files.
Look at the myrmidons doing their jobs.

#55 | Posted by YAV at 2025-08-17 06:13 PM | Reply

Yes, however the doctrine does not empower cities to obstruct the enforcement of federal law.
#50 | Posted by BellRinger

Which Federal laws are being blocked?
Be specific.

#56 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-17 06:14 PM | Reply

Looks like ScottS has found himself a new username.

At 23 plonks he was probably lonely, no one responding to his inanity. What's a sockpuppet to do?

#57 | Posted by YAV at 2025-08-17 06:14 PM | Reply

"Where's your outrage for Federal overreach?"

Did they arrest Roger Stone again?
He's keeping his powder dry for that.

#58 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-17 06:17 PM | Reply

#57: www.funnybeing.com

#59 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-08-17 06:36 PM | Reply

Federal Overreach is in the Eye of the Beholder.

One man's Justice is another man's Tyranny.

Especially when Tribal thinking takes hold.

Which is Always.

My Favorite is how protesting Murders and Land Theft is somehow a federal hate crime because it makes a Jewish person somewhere, somehow,..feel Bad.

The whole anti DEI thing is also about how some white kid,.. somehow...feels Bad; about the facts of American History.

It's Racist Claptrap... A cover for White Supremacist thinking and Colonialist Apologies.

Almost a Race War Mindset.

Trump is a Genuine Bigot... on the level of Ben Quivr, Smotrich and Netanyahu.

I hope they all Get, Buggered in Hell.

#60 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-08-17 06:37 PM | Reply

#55: i.ytimg.com

#61 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-08-17 06:38 PM | Reply

Crime rates are shaped by a wide variety of social and economic factors
#46 | Posted by rstybeach11

Yes there is one factor that holds true in all cases, but you won't want to go down that road.

#62 | Posted by easy_meat at 2025-08-17 06:46 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

#62 | Posted by easy_meat

Already did! You're just showing off your willful ignorance, cultist!

#63 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 06:49 PM | Reply

" #53 | POSTED BY YAV AT 2025-08-17 06:11 PM | FLAG: | "

Deportation is within the purview of the federal government. Given that, I am not seeing overreach.

#64 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-08-17 06:54 PM | Reply

#62 tell us how the jobs report really wasn't that bad ...

#65 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-17 07:09 PM | Reply

#62 tell us how the jobs report really wasn't that bad ...

#65 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2025-08-17 07:09 PM | REPLY | FLAG

Quick! Change the subject!

#66 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-08-17 08:04 PM | Reply

Quick! Change the subject!
#66 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTURDS

That's what this entire charade is.

To get you stupid xenophobic morons to stop thinking about Trump raping children.

#67 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 08:17 PM | Reply

"Deportation is within the purview of the federal government. Given that, I am not seeing overreach"

What you're not seeing is Due Process.

Following the Constitution has suddenly become "overreach" (to the former self-proclaimed Constitutional expert).

#68 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-08-17 08:20 PM | Reply

Define due process for deportation. Also, when Biden opened the floodgates like he did brining in well over 5 million illegally with at best minimal vetting you don't get to play the card that "We can bring them in by the millions but you have to jump through all sorts of hoops and deport on an individual basis. To follow the process you are advocating it would take dozens of years to remove the people that Biden brought in over 4 years.

#69 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-08-17 08:24 PM | Reply

Define due process for deportation.
#69 | POSTED BY BULLBRINGER

Due process is due process.

Like criminal Trump underwent and was convicted for.

You support a pedophile because you're terrified of brown people.

You stupid idiot.

#70 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 08:30 PM | Reply

Due process in the context of deportation refers to the legal rights and procedures the U.S. government must follow before removing (deporting) a person from the country. This principle is enshrined in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution and applies to all "persons," not just citizens.

At its core, due process requires that before an individual is deprived of life, liberty, or property, including the right to remain in the U.S., they must be given:

- Notice of the proceedings and the reasons for possible deportation: The person must be informed of the government's intentions and the legal basis for deportation.
- A fair hearing before an impartial judge: Non-citizens generally have the right to appear before an immigration judge to contest their removal, present evidence, and challenge the government's case.
- The opportunity to examine and challenge evidence: Individuals can see the evidence against them and present their own evidence or witnesses.
- A chance to appeal decisions: Adverse decisions can often be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, and sometimes to federal courts.[1][2][5]

Important limitations and exceptions:
- People in immigration proceedings do not have a constitutional right to a government-provided attorney, which means many must represent themselves if they cannot afford legal counsel.
- There are expedited removal procedures where some people can be deported quickly without a full hearing, especially for those apprehended near the border or shortly after entering the country. In these cases, seeking asylum or demonstrating a "credible fear" can trigger fuller due process protections.[2]
- Due process has been subject to policy changes and legal challenges"certain executive actions and court decisions can affect the scope and strength of these protections.[4][5]

Due process is a fundamental safeguard to ensure fair treatment and prevent arbitrary or wrongful deportation. It remains a critical issue in immigration law, with ongoing debates and legal battles about its exact scope and implementation.[3][5][1][4]

[1] www.vera.org
[2] carmanfullerton.com
[3] www.aclu.org
[4] www.rescue.org
[5] www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org
[6] acaciajustice.org
[7] amicacenter.org
[8] www.aclu.org

#71 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 08:33 PM | Reply

Quick! Change the subject!

#66 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Change the subject from what? The expanding authoritarian power grab using illegal military deployments in our own own country?

#72 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-17 08:33 PM | Reply

To follow the process you are advocating it would take dozens of years to remove the people that Biden brought in over 4 years.
#69 | Posted by BellRinger

Perfect example proving you are not a serious person.

#73 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 08:34 PM | Reply

when Biden opened the floodgates like he did brining in well over 5 million illegally

There's only an estimated 11-12 million total migrants.

This dumb f^** thinks half came in just four years ago ...

#74 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-17 08:35 PM | Reply

People, and I use the term loosely, who can only talk about Biden do so because they can't defend Orange Adolph.

Wait until Bondi shoots Jeffy J's Pekinese dog... maybe then he'll understand. Or not.... prolly not.

#75 | Posted by Corky at 2025-08-17 08:41 PM | Reply

"Define due process for deportation."

The salient Constitutional phrase is ALL PERSONS.

When, exactly, does the illegal lose personhood under the Constitution?

#76 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-08-17 08:51 PM | Reply

#76

When King Donald says so... that just takes all the worry of having to think for oneself out of the equation.

#77 | Posted by Corky at 2025-08-17 08:55 PM | Reply

"To follow the process you are advocating it would take dozens of years"

Even if you're correct, where in the Constitution does someone lose their rights based on how long it would take to keep them?

You're just barfing bullschitt because you can't defend it without lying about their rights

#78 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-08-17 08:55 PM | Reply

"Define due process for deportation."

You used to pretend to support the Constitution.

Under the Constitution, Due Process isn't different for deportation.

#79 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-17 09:00 PM | Reply

The most widely cited sources - Pew and Brookings cite your numbers but the dates on the reports that I just looked at are prior to 2020

#80 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-08-17 09:02 PM | Reply

#80 is a response to #74

#81 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-08-17 09:03 PM | Reply

" When, exactly, does the illegal lose personhood under the Constitution?

#76 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2025-08-17 08:51 PM | FLAG: "

You are conflating being charged with a crime and being deported.

#82 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-08-17 09:04 PM | Reply

Yes, due process is required in deportation proceedings in the United States.
Specifically, the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the Due Process Clause applies to all people in the United States, including non-citizens, regardless of their immigration status.
In the context of deportation, due process generally means the government must provide individuals with fair treatment, including:
Notice: Individuals must be informed of the charges against them and the reasons for the proposed deportation.
Opportunity to be Heard: They must have a chance to present their case, challenge the evidence against them, and argue for any potential relief from deportation, typically through a hearing before an immigration judge.
Access to Counsel: While the government is not obligated to provide free legal representation

#83 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-08-17 09:09 PM | Reply

Yes, due process is required for deportation. The U.S. Constitution guarantees due process rights to all individuals within the United States, including non-citizens, regardless of their immigration status. This means that individuals facing deportation have the right to a fair and impartial hearing before an immigration judge.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
What is Due Process?
Due process, as guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, ensures that the government cannot deprive individuals of life, liberty, or property without following fair legal procedures.
Application to Deportation:
In deportation cases, due process includes the right to be informed of the charges against them, the right to legal representation, the right to present evidence in their defense, and the right to a fair hearing.
Exceptions and Limitations:
While due process is a fundamental right, there can be limitations or variations in its application depending on the specific circumstances. For example, expedited removal procedures may be used for individuals who entered the country without authorization and have been in the country for a short period, but even in these cases, certain due process protections still apply, especially for those seeking asylum.
Importance of Due Process:
Due process is crucial in deportation cases because it ensures fairness and prevents arbitrary or unjust decisions. It allows individuals to present their case, challenge the evidence against them, and potentially avoid deportation if they can demonstrate a legal basis to remain in the United States.

#84 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-08-17 09:11 PM | Reply

Due process happens in either case. Go read your constitution.

#85 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:11 PM | Reply

Article I, Section 8, Clause 18:

[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

In 1903, the Court in the Japanese Immigrant Case reviewed the legality of deporting an alien who had lawfully entered the United States, clarifying that an alien who has entered the country, and has become subject in all respects to its jurisdiction, and a part of its population could not be deported without an opportunity to be heard upon the questions involving his right to be and remain in the United States.1 In the decades that followed, the Supreme Court maintained the notion that once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders.2

Eventually, the Supreme Court extended these constitutional protections to all aliens within the United States, including those who entered unlawfully, declaring that aliens who have once passed through our gates, even illegally, may be expelled only after proceedings conforming to traditional standards of fairness encompassed in due process of law.3 The Court reasoned that aliens physically present in the United States, regardless of their legal status, are recognized as persons guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.4 Thus, the Court determined, [e]ven one whose presence in this country is unlawful, involuntary, or transitory is entitled to that constitutional protection.5 Accordingly, notwithstanding Congress's indisputably broad power to regulate immigration, fundamental due process requirements notably constrained that power with respect to aliens within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.6

Yet the Supreme Court has also suggested that the extent of due process protection may vary depending upon [the alien's] status and circumstance.7 In various opinions, the Court has suggested that at least some of the constitutional protections to which an alien is entitled may turn upon whether the alien has been admitted into the United States or developed substantial ties to this country.8 Thus, while the Court has recognized that due process considerations may constrain the Federal Government's exercise of its immigration power, there is some uncertainty regarding the extent to which these constraints apply with regard to aliens within the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

#86 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:15 PM | Reply

Not counted are roughly 700,000 who entered via the CBP One app, which wasn't part of any statute that I'm aware of. It wasn't a creation of Congress it was just something Biden's team created ostensibly as a work around to the system to get more people into the country.

#87 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-08-17 09:15 PM | Reply

You are to the far right of SCALIA, jeff. All in your pursuit of trumps ----.

www.law.cornell.edu

[March 23, 1993]

Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.

'It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings. See The Japanese Immigrant Case, 189 U.S. 86, 100-101 (1903)."

#88 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:19 PM | Reply


Under the Constitution, Due Process isn't different for deportation.

#79 | Posted by snoofy

The Constitution doesn't define due process, and there are various "processes due" in the American system.

"due process" is a term used to say that the government can't hold you or take your things without some process. IOW Its a governmental activity designed to safeguard the legal rights of the individual.

Deportation has its own process, outside of the criminal and civil systems.
www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org

#89 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:19 PM | Reply

"Well established."

Good night.

#90 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:20 PM | Reply

The Constitution doesn't define due process,

Wrong.

constitutioncenter.org

#91 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:22 PM | Reply

act.represent.us

#92 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:23 PM | Reply

#82 | Posted by BellRinger

And ignoring #71. I can see why.

#93 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-08-17 09:23 PM | Reply

Not counted are roughly 700,000 who entered via the CBP One app, which wasn't part of any statute that I'm aware of

It facilitated the statutes, remember the administration was about stopping illegal immigrants it was about processing as many as it could. To the point of pulling BP agents off the border to process more. In particular the CBPOneApp , enabled checking in at a POE to get the asylum process started.

#94 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:24 PM | Reply

#91 | Posted by Alexandrite a

Read your own link, the Constitution didn't define processes. The processes were worked out later.

All the Constitution says is that there must be processes so the government doesn't run amok

#95 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:26 PM | Reply

There are literally millions of aliens within the jurisdiction of the United States. The Fifth Amendment, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment, protects every one of these persons from deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

" Justice John Paul Stevens in a unanimous 1976 opinion

#96 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:27 PM | Reply

the Constitution didn't define processes.

The interpretation was decided unanimously by the supreme court and upheld several times. Take the L and move on, Twitter can't save you tonight.

#97 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:28 PM | Reply

Alexandrite, to help you understand your own Constitution better, think of it as a FRAMEWORK.

It didn't have all the answers, and hoped the people could fill in the blanks.

#98 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Alexandrite, to help you understand your own Constitution better, think of it as a FRAMEWORK.
It didn't have all the answers, and hoped the people could fill in the blanks.
Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:29 PM | Reply

He doesn't need your "education". He's a lot smarter than you. Just sayin

#99 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-08-17 09:30 PM | Reply

All the Constitution says is that there must be processes so the government doesn't run amok

Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:26 PM | Reply

If you're going to be a literalist, the constitution doesn't actually say that. Pick a lane and stay in it.

#100 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:31 PM | Reply


The interpretation was decided unanimously by the supreme court and upheld several times. Take the L and move on, Twitter can't save you tonight.

Of course it was an interpretation. BECAUSE it wasn't determined at the time of the writing.

All the laws you see US Codes FAR's, the processes of even the Federal Court system were not defined.

These came later and had to conform to the idea of a "due process".

#101 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:31 PM | Reply

These came later and had to conform to the idea of a "due process".
#101 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

What's your point. ?

#102 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:31 PM | Reply


If you're going to be a literalist, the constitution doesn't actually say that. Pick a lane and stay in it.

No but the court rulings did, they said this does and doesn't conform to a "due process"

How do you not understand your own system of government?

#103 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:32 PM | Reply

The court rulings said "run amok"?

Where?

Link please.

#104 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:33 PM | Reply

And people have filled in the blanks, as in #96.

We have a 250 years almost of such decisions.

#105 | Posted by Corky at 2025-08-17 09:33 PM | Reply


What's your point. ?

#102 | Posted by Alexandrite

That there are different due processes in the US system. They all don't have to go through a court system.

#106 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:33 PM | Reply

The court rulings said "run amok"?

Talk about literal.

The founding fathers created the constitution to prevent the government from abusing its citizens (run amok)

You can't be as dense as Corky, but here we are.

#107 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:34 PM | Reply

That there are different due processes in the US system. They all don't have to go through a court system.
#106 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

Where did I say that they did?

You're playing with yourself using grok or some AI. Make a valid point.

#108 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:34 PM | Reply

That there are different due processes in the US system. They all don't have to go through a court system.
Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-17 09:33 PM | Reply

Actually they do. Who else has the power to determine if due processes are fulfilled hmmmmmmmmmmm??

#109 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-08-17 09:36 PM | Reply

Trump is ignoring the 5th and 14th amendments.

Jeff says "nuh uh"

and Oneironut is arguing procedure with himself and using strawmen and ad hominem.

#110 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:36 PM | Reply

Here's a question for jeff and Oneironaut:

What act could trump possibly do that you would not vociferously defend and run interference for him on?

Name One.

#111 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:40 PM | Reply

Here's a question for jeff and Oneironaut:
What act could trump possibly do that you would not vociferously defend and run interference for him on?
Name One.

Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-08-17 09:40 PM | Reply

The silence is deafening.

#112 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-08-17 09:57 PM | Reply

Oh no!

Immigrants!!!

Say the people who couldn't care less about Trump raping children.

#113 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-08-17 11:52 PM | Reply

Hi Easy Meat! What's it like cheerleading for a pedo?

#114 | Posted by hamburglar at 2025-08-18 05:14 AM | Reply

What's your point. ?

#102 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE

That reality is fluid and they get to make s^%* up to satisfy their whims at any given moment.

#115 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-18 08:07 AM | Reply

When, exactly, does the illegal lose personhood under the Constitution?
#76 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

You are conflating being charged with a crime and being deported.
#82 | Posted by BellRinger

Okay let's walk it back. Quote the words in The Constitution that guarantees Due Process when being charged with a crime.

#116 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-08-18 10:49 AM | Reply

Change the subject from what? The expanding authoritarian power grab using illegal military deployments in our own own country?

#72 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-17 08:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

19% MF,there are reason(s)

#117 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-08-18 11:15 AM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort