-
Posts
1606 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by Ojo Rojo
-
-
41 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
And none of that is close to an actual remedy for the guy in prison in El Salvador. You're trust that such a remedy will appear is misplaced. That's been my point. It continues to be my point. And it continues to be true. SCOTUS already neutered 1 possible remedy. And it impliedly neutered the second with its most recent decision.
What do you think the S. Court should have done? What do you think the district court should do?
-
25 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
And when they comply by saying we've reached out, El Salvador doesn't know where he is/isn't going to return him, nothing we can do?
No. I'm not an expert on procedure in these situations; I don't know how anyone could be since this is unprecedented. What I think would happen is that the judge would continue pressing for information and for the people with that information to appear. Who ordered the plane to take off? Bring them here. Who was the last person to see him alive? Bring them here. Who is our liaison with the Salvadoran prison? Bring them here. Etc., etc. If those people refuse to answer the judge's questions then she can hold them in contempt and put them in jail.
-
40 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:
You seem to have a real pulse on the situation.
It was more of a rhetorical statement inviting others to say what they think will happen and why. Guess I should have been more clear.
-
1
-
-
Trump Co. lawyers are trying to figure out what to do, making recommendations and giving advice to the president. If they don't give the updates or the updates don't contain substantive information then I would think contempt is on the table. I guess that would mean that Noem would be subject to contempt since she is the named party and ultimately would be jailed if the government doesn't comply with the court order. That would be something. Ultimately, Trump is going to have to decide whether or not to comply. If he doesn't, I cannot predict what will happen. If Abrego Garcia is already dead, I also cannot predict what will happen next. In either case, chaos, mayhem, massive protests, violence. Or nothing at all.
-
3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
There was no reason to disturb the judge's original order. It just delayed getting him home/ the fight that is going to happen anyway.
The lukewarm language was almost certainly to allow them to get it to 9-0. It doesn't actually require the government get him back. It just requires the government to maybe try, sort of. If the government does anything but get him back, you'll eventually have an order from the judge that requires them to take some concrete step that the government will deny based upon separation of powers. That's when the real fireworks will start. Again, celebrating this is way premature. Celebrate when the government actually gets him home.
The language was the result of negotiations between the justices, sure. I won't say who orchestrated it. I agree about the fireworks.
Can we all just feel a little bit good about the fact that the Supreme Court didn't suck Trump's dick?
-
Just now, Dahobbs said:
Celebrating an unsigned decision that doesn't really require anything and adds the language the government wanted regarding due deference to the executive branch's responsibility for foreign diplomacy seems a bit premature. It was a weak a decision that largely punted on the things that mattered. I hope he gets home. I hope the government actually tries to get him home. I'm not holding my breath on that.
It was 9-0. The reason it is unsigned is so that no particular justice gets assassinated over it. What it does, in practice, is this - it doesn't decide whether the federal court exceeded it's authority, which is the big, huge Constitutional bugaboo. Instead, it gave the district court a shot at language that wouldn't offend the executive's foreign affairs authority, it also gives the government a chance to comply and bring the guy back without having to answer the big question. They even signaled what word to use, "direct." It's basically saying, "Okay, pres., your move. But if you force the issue you are not going to like the answer."
-
On 4/8/2025 at 12:09 PM, Dahobbs said:
The Court will not do that. And if it did, Trump will not do that. And the dude is probably already dead.
Here is what Roberts will say: He should not have been deported and that was wrong, but separation of powers prevents the courts from forcing the executive to engage in foreign policy. The proper remedy is to file a habeas petition prior to deportation. You may also be able to file a civil rights action for violation of rights assuming you even manage to get back to the country. Too bad, so sad. He has fucking telegraphed this shit and fucking Barrett joining the dissent should tell you that she knows what is about to happen too.
It's pronounced, "Ekki, ekki, ekki, ekki, ptang."
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 4/8/2025 at 8:50 PM, Firemans4Horn said:
I’m sure @Ojo Rojo can tie himself in knots to say how Roberts didn’t give Trump carte blanche on disappearing people. But he would be wrong. #magicalthinking #habeuscorpus
-
2 hours ago, fuggled said:
The judge in the Abrego Garcia case quickly updated her orders last night. DOJ has a deadline in about 20 minutes to explain what steps they've taken so far and what other steps they plan to take.
-
1
-
-
-
2 hours ago, Jive Turkey said:
Apparently, a few days ago, senior government officials filed an amicus brief in the lawsuit Perkins Coie filed against DOJ because of Trump’s executive order. Those senior government officials are represented by Susman Godfrey (and a Yale law clinic), who wrote the brief. Yeah, Trump was coming after them. Susman had some strong language:
https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2025/04/gov.uscourts.dcd_.278290.98.1.pdf
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
I'll be pedantic if you will: look up the definition of wager. While a gentleman's bet may not wager money, it does wager something. That's what makes it a bet. What distinguishes a gentlemen's bet versus other bets is that it is not enforced by an outside party or agreement. It is strictly on the honor of the participants to fulfill their obligations under the bet.
Jesus. Fine. If I win you have to come on here and say, "Ekki-Ekki-Ekki-Ekki-PTANG."
-
1 minute ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:
maybe you should step back and listen to what people are trying to tell you instead of telling yourself what you want to hear
So, agree with everyone here, or else?
-
2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
It isn't a bet unless there is something at stake. Don't worry, I'll be reminding you regularly that you're wrong.
A "gentleman's bet" typically refers to a wager, often involving no money, where the agreement to honor the outcome is based on honor and sportsmanship, rather than a formal contract. -
Just now, immamac said:
I can't tell if ojo is trolling or just a complete fucking idiot.
Et tu, immamac?
-
Just now, TexArcher said:
Is there a name for what's wrong with you? I don't want to laugh at a guy with an actual condition.
Non-histrionicism?
It's sad that a guy with some faith in the system gets insulted and shouted down like this. No dissenting opinions allowed? Sounds familiar. I haven't lost all hope yet, and for good reason. None of this shit has played out, despite what anyone says. If all of you really believed that the Republic was dead, why haven't you done something? I mean, something other than lament it on the internet. If the courts abandon the Constitution and bend the knee or if Trump Co. openly violates a final court order, then I'll believe it's over.-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
I'll bet $1,000 sent to this guys family that he doesn't get returned to the US within the next 2 years, if ever. I truly hope I'm wrong and I'm paying.
P.S. your take is still stupid.
You don't have to do anything; that's what a gentleman's bet is. If it turns out I'm wrong I will be the first to accept and admit it. I will also be the first out on the street with my torch and pitchfork.
Just now, royiv said:I ask this with all due respect, are you mentally disabled?
Nope. Just following the directions of the U.S. Supreme Court.
-
2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
What's the remedy? How do you do it?
Here is what we know you can't do:
1) enjoin the government from deporting you without notice
2) actually file a habeas petition because, you know, you weren't given notice
3) force the government to get you returned (because even if the court could order that, it doesn't practically matter if the other country doesn't want to return you).
File a habeas petition in the jurisdiction where I'm detained. If they ship me off before I can do that then I also claim a violation of the 5th Amendment for lack of due process. My case will go through the courts and, if the courts follow the law (and their most recent opinion), I will be returned.
-
7
-
-
Just now, Dahobbs said:
The Court will not do that. And if it did, Trump will not do that. And the dude is probably already dead.
Here is what Roberts will say: He should not have been deported and that was wrong, but separation of powers prevents the courts from forcing the executive to engage in foreign policy. The proper remedy is to file a habeas petition prior to deportation. You may also be able to file a civil rights action for violation of rights assuming you even manage to get back to the country. Too bad, so sad. He has fucking telegraphed this shit and fucking Barrett joining the dissent should tell you that she knows what is about to happen too.
Gentleman's bet?
-
1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:Just now, DigglerontheHoof said:
It's already happened you obtuse piece of shit.
I know. What hasn't happened yet is that the case has not reached the end. Gentleman's bet - the courts will order him returned and he will be.
1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:And you're a fucking idiot. You've been illegally deported without notice. What is your remedy? How do you enforce it?
Answer from Roberts: None.
You also can't read or understand legal opinions.
-
10 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
You have zero fucking clue what you're talking about. Yes, the opinion says the right exists. But it says the only way to enforce it is to file a habeas petition prior to being snatched and deported. The ability to do that depends on, you know, getting notice and the time to do that, the very fucking thing the administration was NOT FUCKING DOING you dense motherfucker. Take the guy who was illegally deported to a prison in El Salvador as an example. He got no notice of his deportation, so no ability to bring a habeas action prior to being deported. Oh, and the government's defense isn't that he should have been deported, it is that now that he is deported, the government can't do anything about it and can't be forced to do anything about it. So, Roberts has now said that you can't do anything in advance of being deported to defend your right. And he has vacated an order from the District Court that provided the only mechanism to prevent the administration from violating the law. Oh, and Roberts has now also stayed an order of the District Court, fully endorsed in an unanimous opinion by an appellate panel, that would have required Trump to at least fucking try to get the guy back from El Salvador who was illegally deported there.
So, you tell me motherfucker, how exactly am I wrong? What is the legal mechanism is practically available to a person illegally deported without notice? Oh, none. Thanks. Go fuck yourself.
5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:Let me be very clear, you, @Ojo Rojo, deserve to be deported without notice and sent to prison for being either densest motherfucker on the planet or just an actual shit stain. I sincerely hope it happens to you, fucking leopards and shit.
You have lost your fucking mind.
-
17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:
Dicta which is meaningless. Once the government does an end-around that and does not provide notice before removal occurs (which is exactly what they have been doing, and will continue to do), you will be in a prison in El Salvador. And now, it's too late -- no remedy is available, because you are out of US government hands. That is the fucking play. How do we know? Because they are actually running it, right now, in real-time. The court alluded to a solution that the Regime will not allow to be implemented.
You still. Don't. Fucking. Get it.
You and Wildcat and Fudge Nuggets and Dahobbs can writhe around in ashes while wearing your sackcloth and wail about things that haven't actually happened yet, that's fine. I'll pass. I'm not blind. I see what's happening. Bad things have happened, but the courts have not had their final say on any of them. This most recent opinion is not a bellwether or the final word. It's a step in the process. Get ahold of yourselves.
-
5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:
Oh, bullshit. It provides a "win" with zero ability to enforce or address it. It literally vacates what should have been an unappealable order that was also the only way the Court had to keep Trump from violating the law. The opinion glosses over the fact that administration was violating the known law and rights of people legally in the United States. How exactly are people supposed to enforce their habeas claim when the administration isn't providing the required notice and is instead just instantly deporting them? What mechanism does the person or the court have to fix that? Roberts simply abandons that core issue. Read the dissent. Your answer is bullshit and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Sorry, dude. You're wrong.
From SCOTUSblog: The court made clear that – as the government agrees – the plaintiffs, as well as others who may be detained or removed under the AEA, are entitled to be notified “that they are subject to removal under the Act.” Moreover, the court added, addressing an argument made by lawyers for the plaintiffs during oral arguments in the lower courts, the government must provide that notice “within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.”
4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:I think I hate you more than the actual nazis.
You have issues.
-
4
-
-
@Firemans4Horn@Brisketexan What? The opinion gives due process rights to the detained and says that they have to have their habeas petitions heard where they are detained. It also didn't reach the big question, which is whether the AEA applied. This hasn't played all the way out yet.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Trump’s El Salvador Gulag
in Cloak Room
Posted
This all started when I said the Roberts court would follow the Constitution. They did. From there, I have no faith in Trump Co. whatsoever. I don't know if they will follow a Supreme Court order or not. No one does. We may find out soon. What I recognize, that you aren't, is that this is a process; a very delicate one. It's not over. You keep saying it's over and that proves that the republic is done, the Supreme Court are proven stooges, etc. etc., when it's not actually over. The SCOTUS opinion was worded in a very specific way. Without knowing for sure, I would bet that in their deliberations Roberts called for 9-0 to send a message and in exchange the conservatives got their language about due regard to executive power over foreign affairs. One thing this accomplished is that it gave Trump the ability to avoid a showdown. He's fucking around, being a dick about it, of course. Not answering the federal judge's questions, spouting bullshit. Fine, douchebag. The statement from Bukele was made while he was sitting in a room with Trump. As a sycophantic pawn, what the fuck else would you expect him to say? If Trump tells him to release the man, he will release him. Simple as that.
What this will boil down to, I believe, is public opinion. It's politics. Do a majority of Americans believe Abrego Garcia should be returned? Does that political analysis dictate that it would be politically advantageous to bring him back, or disadvantageous to not do so? Same question with respect to defying the courts - politically good or bad? I think the wonks are trying to crank out the answers and that's what everyone is waiting for. I think it's close, which is why it has taken as long as it has already.