Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (36) |
Author: Steve203 🐝 HONORARY
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84357 
Subject: Re: Minnesota 1, Spankee 0
Date: 02/15/26 5:16 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 2
It has always been the case that if you are present in the country unlawfully, you are subject to detention and (after due process) deportation.

What "due process"?

Trump admin secretly deports nine individuals to Cameroon despite US court protections: Report

The Trump administration covertly deported nine individuals to Cameroon, even though many of them had U.S. court protections preventing such deportations, and none of them was from that African country, according to a report by the New York Times.

Many of these men and women sent to Cameroon on a flight from Alexandria, Louisiana, on 14 January did not know their destination until they were put on a Department of Homeland Security flight and placed in handcuffs and chains, the publication said, citing government documents and attorneys for the deportees.


livemint.com - Trump admin secretly deports nine individuals to cameroon despite US court protections report

As noted before, we are, increasingly, seeing how much USian "justice" and "rule of law" depends on the actors being people of good will, as it is apparent, there are holes in the laws large enough to fly a 747 full of brown people in chains through.

The people who are elected get to set policy, and as long as that policy isn't outside the Constitutional limits of government they have the right to do it.

The argument put forward by the defense in the second impeachment was, words to the effect: the President sets policy in the national interest, as he sees it. If he decides it is in the national interest to ignore an election, and stay in power, then it's OK to do so"

By resisting the legal dismantling of constitutional protections and democratic governance.

That gets you tagged as a "domestic terrorist".

Steve
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to Steve203 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (36) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community