Timothy Birdnow

Here is an interesting article discussing the legal implications of Trump invoking the Alien Enemies Act and the ridiculous court ruling that demanded the Administration turn planes around in mid air and international waters and return the gangster thugs. The author makes many good points but he criticizes the Administration for making public political arguments and not legal ones. I tend to disagree with him on this; the legal arguments will come. Right now Trump is playing rope-a-dope with the Left, angering regular Americans but not showing his cards as of yet (well, his peeps,notably Pam Bondi, are the ones doing that.)

The fact is this is a battle Trump will win. He holds all the cards - the AEA is old, established law that does NOT simply pertain to a time of war but can be used when the President believes it necessary, as the text and historical context shows (there was no war in effect in 1798 when the bill was passed.) It specifically mentions INVASION which we most certainly just endured. Also, SCOTUS has ruled in bygone times that the President has sole power over evicting illegal aliens and that his power is not under judicial review.

U.S. code 8 USC 1252 says:

"No court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed a criminal offense."

The author rightly states the Constitution does not give the power of judicial review to the Courts; they usurped that in Marbury v. Madison. But America is not under a purely codified legal structure but under British Common Law, and precedents do actually make law. Congress let John Marshall get away with asserting that in Marbury and thus it became law - although it is not actually Constitutional law. Of course if someone wanted to challenge it they would have to use the courts...

And he is also right in worrying about which way this double-minded court will swing. You can never trust John Roberts, nor Amy Conehead Barrett.

So this judge has no legal leg to stand on - he was just trying to toss something to see if it would stick. And to grandstand and give Democrats a hook to grab onto. The hope is, of course, that they will run with it, painting Trump as lawless and tyrannical. Trump is focusing on the nature of the deportees and how these are the scum of the Earth and the Democrats want to protect them over protecting Americans. I don't dispute his approach; he's trying to circumvent media propaganda. Most people will not understand or even bother to read the legal arguments.

The author rightly argues that this legal strategy of trying to get a SCOTUS ruling in his favor is a high risk tactic and could backfire. He argues it would be better to simply deny the lower court's authority altogether. How would that work out? He could do it but if in two years the Democrats take both houses of Congress Trump will be impeached and removed from office and prosecuted to the fullest extent possible. They'll try to do it anyway, but it will be much harder if Trump doesn't give them so dandy a weapon. The author's point is correct but he doesn't quite grasp the political realities. And the public will not understand Trump is in the right, not after the media spin machine goes into overdrive. Better to do this by the book.

I think Trump and Bondi and company know what they are doing here.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:39 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 602 words, total size 4 kb.