anon_
10hr ago
the ONLY substantive difference between the present situation and the one where the government didn't make the error is that maybe Garcia's deportation to El Salvador would have been briefly delayed.
Sure. And the only difference between executing Tim McVeigh in 1997 after his conviction instead of 1995 after his arrest was a delay. It's not like there was any chance of him being acquitted.
The withholding order was based on threats that no longer exist.
This claim is probably true, but it doesn't matter because that argument was never actually brought up.
The only real argument here is
That is not the only real argument.
Unfortunately, the scale of this problem is so huge that only swift and aggressive action can possibly address it
I think you are going to quickly find that there are between 0-2 votes on the Supreme Court for that, and that the only way to actually tackle the problem is to have a competent and diligent program of enforcement. One that I have consistently been in favor of (which is a nice thing about posting histories) for years before this administration decided to do it in a spectacular incompetent fashion.
What folks like you fail to comprehend is that trying to achieve a goal incompetently is not directionally correct -- by negative association is makes the goal even further away. You are just delaying (if not destroying) any ability to actually reckon with the scale of illegal and temporary immigrants.
anon_
22hr ago
Your link quotes things like
The 17 Year-2 States found that half of the cases with improper authorization for payment errors were due to missing or insufficient documentation.
Yeah, if you fill out your documentation wrong, it causes it to be denied. That's hardly the kind of error we're talking about
The IRS makes mistakes when taxing people less than 1% of the time... which is still 50 times worse than your "unacceptable" rate for "deporting people who were definitely supposed to be deported, but missing a step in the paperwork".
You mean removing people to a country for which they had a legally binding order withholding removal.
That's not a "step in the paperwork" kind of mistake.
There's too many cites to bother linking them all, but I'm seeing false conviction rates ranging from 1-12%... including a purported 4% rate of executing innocent people
Are you seriously quoting some left wing boogeyman that 1/25 executions being of the innocent? That's absurd enough not to even merit further investigation.
anon_
23hr ago
I think we agree on a number of things: this was incompetence and that due legal process will not prevent all incompetence-based errors.
I think where we disagree is that this particular error was incompetence of such degree as to be a violation of due process (all but conceded by the government anyway) and that violations of this kind (ignorance of a duly entered legal order that they had a legal duty to know about) are the kind of things that can be prevented. One doesn't need to think that every error can be prevented to believe that such a glaringly obvious one can be.
Maybe, but I suspect that what happened here is that they wanted to actually execute their core function before activist judges tarpit them, and rushed things so much that they missed an order that someone failed to input properly into database back in 2019, or something like that. This is not meant to imply that they didn’t do anything wrong, it’s just operating in hostile legal environment will cause mistake rate to be higher.
I think they are quickly going to learn that this strategy. And the sooner they internalize that if they don't do so, they are going to be restrained from doing anything, the sooner that lesson gets passed up the chain that if their leadership wants anything done, they better do it properly.
anon_
23hr ago
I would happily concede this is all fine if the error rate is indeed 1/100K. Will you concede that it's unacceptable to be 1/5k?
And yes, I think the CBP does not incorrectly turn away more than 1/10K people at the border.
anon_
1d ago
In the Garcia case, the government made a mistake by not complying with that withholding. There is an implication here that if Garcia’s due process rights were met, he would not have been deported to El Salvador.
That's not true, there was certainly a way to meet his rights and still deport him to ES. At the very least, the executive ought to dissolve its own order.
There is no amount of due process that will prevent government from ever making mistakes of this sort
Seriously? There is no amount of due process that will prevent the government from not following its own orders?
I feel like "there is a reliable central database run by a group half as competent as the dude responsible for delivering burritos" isn't even an amount of due process, it's a basic measure of government competence.
and excessive efforts of judiciary and activists using the judiciary to prevent mistakes meaningfully detract from the Executive’s ability to execute its core function.
I'm not sure a case about the judiciary restraining a dysfunctional government is really meaningfully detracting the government from getting its shit together. If anything, a kick in the ass might actually help them realize that in order to execute their core function, they first need to achieve operational competence.
anon_
1d ago
But because some braindead or politically captured bureaucrat rubber stamped his paperwork where he claimed he'd be in danger if he returned to his own country they granted a targeted stay of deportation, which precipitated this entire clusterfuck.
Another Art II bureaucrat would have rubber stamped the dissolution of that order had this government had their shit together enough to even know it existed.
It's not the minor procedural error that stings, it's the not even knowing.
like Boasberg or Xinis, who override the determinations of Article II examiners at will, making it effectively impossible to enforce law at scale
What in the world are you talking about? In the Garcia case (that's in front of Xinis), it was the Article II examiner (in 2019, under Trump!) that signed the order withholding removal.
I really don't comprehend how you character this as overriding that determination. If anything, Boasberg is doing the polar opposite -- enforcing it.
anon_
1d ago
The historical Anglo-Saxon judicial tradition upon which the Common Law is based always afforded judges the right, and indeed in many cases implicitly obligated them, to respect the people’s will.
They are required to respect the people's will as enacted by the legislature, not the people's will as reported in a pew opinion poll or an online forum.
anon_
1d ago
I feel revealing that they don't like sharing a bathroom with men doesn't have much bearing on whether they would, in a different world, share it with only the subset of men that are socially presenting as women.
You could easily imagine both categories.
anon_
2d ago
Because not too many folks (least of all Trump) “believes that life begins at conception” in the sense you do.
While abortion was the issue; this difference might have been ignored. With that done, the pro-life movement can’t rely on it to paper over fundamental differences.
anon_
2d ago
Sex? They're IVF babies.
And Trump himself put the kibosh on the pro-life folks going after IVF -- he personally stepped in to the Alabama drama over it and talked about how they are making the most beautiful babies - the best babies.
anon_
2d ago
What's with all these conservative influencers being such weird sluts once you wave a few million in front of them?
It's not at all "slutting out" if he impregante you via IVF. That is well beyond any reasonable meaning of the word.
anon_
2d ago
A ton of data says that broken families have horrible social outcomes.
The data do in fact say that, but they don't really establish whether those outcomes are due to the broken families themselves or to the fact that the kind of people that have broken families have children that are like them.
In fact, when looking at outcomes for kids raised in single parent families due to a factor uncorrelated with the parents' psychological traits (e.g. died in a car accident) you see a much smaller effect than single parent families that are strongly correlated with such traits (e.g. divorced due to infidelity due to poor impulse control).
anon_
2d ago
If you wanted to isolate China, you wouldn't immediately tariff their neighbors, you'd try to woo their regional neighbors to join your own aligned bloc. Ideally you'd do it in a group fashion to present a unified bloc and get more leverage -- a kind of organization of countries in the area.
I would call it the Across Asia Organization -- or AAO.
anon_
2d ago
But is this really worse than what the experts were cooking up in terms of DEI, mass immigration and green economics?
That's a sufficiently low bar that we (not you, all of us collectively) ought to be ashamed of it.
I consider DEI, expensive energy and mass migration as core policies of the mainstream right and left, everyone besides Trump and Trump-adjacent figures. As far as I'm concerned, these are bad policies.
I recall Cheney and Bush being excellent on domestic energy production, such that the fruits of their policies were felt well into the Obama administration on lowered natural gas prices.
He also openly admitted that his party, the CDU, had failed to secure the tax relief for workers on which they had campaigned, because of “disagreement” with the Social Democrats
If only there were some other party with which the CDU could have formed a coalition.
anon_
2d ago
If you have, say eight out of 20 board appointments thanks to your quota, and then you bitch that one of them is a trans-woman when that seat is clearly the birth-right of a biological woman, that seems incredibly petty.
Indeed. I can't be happy about a slap fight between the women and the transwomen fighting over the spoils of an obviously discriminatory quota policy. The entire dispute reeks -- no board should ever impose a requirement based on sex or gender or any combination thereof in the first place.
anon_
2d ago
Yeah, and arguments about the sanctity of poverty are usually deployed by the well off too. It's just cope.
I can understand that people that experience calamity can find meaning, but most of them would still not wish calamity upon their children. Moreover, it certainly doesn't mean that there is a sensible reason for it.
I mean, the IRS can look at my tax paperwork and begin enforcement proceedings against me. That doesn't require a judge either (until I take them to tax court).
That doesn't imply that they can just freeze my bank accounts while skipping that step. The step is important, even if it wouldn't change the outcome in this specific case.
More options
Context Copy link