- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Boasberg plans to move quickly on Trump contempt inquiry in major immigration case
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:13 pm to Decatur
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:13 pm to Decatur
quote:
Under what circumstances (if any) is it ok to ignore/disobey a judge’s order?
There isn’t one…..which is why Barry throws rocks instead of answering.
0
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:17 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
It was completely retarded and I knew someone was going to pay the price for giving the green light to send the plane(s).
No one is going to "pay the price". Everyone knows this. Boasberg is just putting on a show.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:18 pm to loogaroo
Judge emergency orders good.
President emergency orders bad. But only from Trump are they bad, other presidents can do whatever.
President emergency orders bad. But only from Trump are they bad, other presidents can do whatever.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:21 pm to Bama Mountain
quote:
Shhhh, any mention of ignoring unlawful orders means you are a seditious traitor.
Can you find me this judges or any judge going against expedited deportations under Bush or Obama?
quote:
Yesterday the Migration Policy Institute ("MPI") released the report, The Deportation Dilemma: Reconciling Tough and Humane Enforcement, on the Obama administration's immigration enforcement record. One of MPI's principal findings is that the deportation system has dramatically changed over the past 19 years – moving from a judicial system prior to 1996, where the vast majority of people facing deportation had immigration court hearings, to a system today of nonjudicial removals, where 75 percent of people removed do not see a judge before being expelled from the U.S.
The numbers are staggering: in 1995, 1,400 immigrants were subject to nonjudicial removals, representing 3 percent of total deportations. By FY 2012 that number had sharply increased to 313,000 nonjudicial removals – an all-time high.
quote:
By contrast, nonjudicial removals are fast-track proceedings wholly controlled by the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"), sometimes involving only a single border agent who acts as both judge and jury. Those facing nonjudicial removal have no lawyer and no chance to appeal.
The Obama administration has prioritized speed over fairness in the removal system, sacrificing individualized due process in the pursuit of record removal numbers.
This post was edited on 11/25/25 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:23 pm to dgnx6
Why can't the administration just wait until there is a ruling on the merits? I thought all the judge did was preserve the status quo until the case was decided.
This post was edited on 11/25/25 at 3:24 pm
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:28 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Why can't the administration just wait until there is a ruling on the merits? I thought all the judge did was preserve the status quo until the case was decided.
Because no judges and certainly not you gave a flying frick about this until Trump.
All this is doing is to subvert our democracy. The country elected Trump to deport people.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:28 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Why can't the administration just wait until there is a ruling on the merits?
Because the planes were already loaded and ready. It was a knee jerk reaction from a idiot judge. The judge is putting on a show now to try and save face and garner some attention. It is a waste of time and money.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:33 pm to loogaroo
Boasberg should be launched into the Sun or back wherever the he or his parents slithered out of.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:36 pm to Bama Mountain
quote:
It depends on who the President is?
No dummy. It depends upon the facts and circumstances. You’re a binary thinker. You won’t understand why.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:37 pm to Decatur
quote:
Under what circumstances (if any) is it ok to ignore/disobey a judge’s order?
You can’t think of a single reason why a judge’s order would be ignored? How many do you want me to list?
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:37 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
You won’t understand why.
Translation: “I have no fricking clue and I’m talking out of my arse (again).”
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:57 pm to Decatur
quote:
Translation: “I have no fricking clue and I’m talking out of my arse (again).”
Wrong. You can’t think of a single reason why you could ignore a judges order? Not a single thing? Yikes.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:58 pm to BBONDS25
You have the floor. Please proceed.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 3:59 pm to Decatur
Protecting health or safety is a well established precedent. You dumb frick.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 4:01 pm to loogaroo
Marbury v. Madison was wrong
Posted on 11/25/25 at 4:01 pm to Decatur
quote:I'm surprised at your posts here.
Decatur
Very surprised.
A lower court Judge, with severe TDS, ignores or attempts to circumvent a recent SCOTUS ruling. Yet, you believe the burden of the Exec Branch is to follow a lower court ruling within the Judicial Branch, even though the issue was previously decided? That is a dangerous Judicial position, my man. VERY DANGEROUS for the "co-equal" Judiciary Branch !
Posted on 11/25/25 at 4:06 pm to Decatur
quote:
Trump admin disobeyed his order. It’s find out time
I laughed at how on the nose this comment was until I noticed the poster...and realized he was serious!
This post was edited on 11/25/25 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 11/25/25 at 4:16 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Protecting health or safety is a well established precedent.
For disobeying a court order? What line of cases is this?
Posted on 11/25/25 at 4:17 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Yet, you believe the burden of the Exec Branch is to follow a lower court ruling within the Judicial Branch, even though the issue was previously decided?
The contempt issue hasn’t been adjudicated.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 4:19 pm to Riverside
quote:Link?
SCOTUS approved Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act last week.
I recall only a procedural ruling preserving the status quo pending a full review.
This post was edited on 11/25/25 at 5:43 pm
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News