Civil War: MAGA in Turmoil

[Phil C. McNasty]

And here is the final nail in @Valcazar and @Shaquille Oatmeal 's argument.
Both these guys claim that Trump's policies have led to either an increase in US citizens being illegally deported, or are not following deportation proceedings properly.

I did a search and a study was done in 2011 that concluded roughly 1 to 1.5 percent of all removals were US citizens.
So mistakes like this was were happening well before Trump took office. And Trump has actually wrongfully deported less than that, assuming the 70 people number is correct

Read and weep:

Google Search

The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA), signed into law by President Clinton, significantly expanded the categories of offenses for which legal permanent residents could be deported, making the process faster and reducing judicial review. This law, and the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, created an environment where errors could, and likely did, occur, but specific numbers from that era are unavailable.

Later studies have noted that some people legally in the country were affected by these laws, including green card holders who had been residents for decades. A 2011 study estimated that citizens make up roughly 1 to 1.5 percent of all removals, but this figure covers a different time frame (post-2003) and still suggests that the issue has been ongoing. Cases of wrongful deportation, when they come to light, are often individual, high-profile incidents that are litigated in court, rather than systematically tracked by the government

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

No.
That is like saying if someone is suspected of committing murder, they should first be sentenced to life in prison without trial and then they can appeal that sentence if they want.
That is not how due process works.
Due process is provided before a removal.
Any request to reopen your case after one is out of the country is a remedy, not fulfillment of due process requirements before removal.
This is not semantics. This is a very important difference

Filing an appeal is exactly what due process is. You have no idea what you're talking about

No I do not agree.
Even undocumented immigrants should be given due process.
Meaning they should be detained, presented in immigration court, the judge then hears their case and issues a removal order, they then get to appeal that if they want and they are only removed if and when the appeal process is done and they lost their case.
This due process is not being provided for detainees by ICE

This is simply not true. Nobody is getting deported without due prcoess.
You're just making shit up now

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Whats this @Shaquille Oatmeal?? Are you gonna admit you're wrong??

Google Search

Yes, filing an appeal to federal court after an illegal deportation or to challenge removal proceedings is a key part of the due process system in U.S. immigration law, allowing non-citizens to challenge agency decisions and claim rights to notice and a hearing, even if the process is complex and sometimes limited by statutes like expedited removal. It provides a way to seek judicial review, ensuring basic fairness, as immigrants can contest orders in immigration courts, appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) (BIA), and then petition federal courts for review of BIA decisions

 

[Valcazar]

The burden of proof is on you (or rather the administration), not on me (or rather the report writers).

Actually, the report writers would have been forbidden from publishing the information most likely, since the point of the report was an audit of the process after the 2015 policy was implemented.



The individuals in question were not the point of the report. The policy and record keeping was.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Filing an appeal is exactly what due process is. You have no idea what you're talking about

It is not an appeal if you are deported without a hearing.
It is not due process if you are deported without a hearing.

This is simply not true. Nobody is getting deported without due process.

Nope, that is the crux of the issue.
That people are getting deported without due process.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Whats this @Shaquille Oatmeal?? Are you gonna admit you're wrong??

Google Search

You are just misusing words out of context and asking AI. lmfao.
As I said, due process needs to be provided BEFORE deportation.
Asking to reopen your case after you are out of the country, is not an appeal.
You are not appealing a removal order at that point because it wasn't issued by a judge.
You were removed without one, which is why it is a violation of due process in the first place.

 

[Valcazar]

No matter.
It's fun to see progressives become constitutionalists.

Huh?
Progressives have always been Constitutionalists.

 

[Valcazar]

The due process is the appeal you file with US immigration if/when you've been wrongfully deported

That is part of due process.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Whats this @Shaquille Oatmeal?? Are you gonna admit you're wrong??

Google Search

Since you have so much trouble and trust Google AI a lot, here is a short summary from AI:

Deportation Without a Removal Order is a Due Process Violation
Deporting an immigrant without a proper removal order and a legal hearing is a violation of due process rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment.
Why it's a violation:

• Right to Notice and a Hearing: Due process requires the government to provide formal notice of charges and an opportunity for a hearing before an impartial immigration judge.
• Protection Against Arbitrary Action: The formal process safeguards individuals from being deported arbitrarily or mistakenly (e.g., mistaken identity of a U.S. citizen).
• Established Precedent: Supreme Court precedent confirms all persons on U.S. soil are entitled to this protection.

Challenging an Illegal Deportation: Remedy vs. Due Process
An immigrant can pursue legal action to challenge a deportation that occurred without a removal order.
Is this challenge due process or a remedy?
It is a remedy, which is the legal mechanism used to correct the initial violation of due process.

Term	Definition	Application in this case
Due Process	The right to a fair and formal procedure guaranteed by the Constitution.	This right was violated when the deportation occurred without a hearing/order.
Remedy	The legal enforcement mechanism used after a right has been violated to restore justice.	This is the challenge filed in federal court (e.g., Habeas Corpus, Motion to Reopen) to fix the violation.

Legal Avenues for a Remedy:

• Habeas Corpus Petition: Filed in federal court to challenge unlawful removal.
• Motion to Reopen Proceedings: Filed with immigration courts/BIA arguing fundamental error.
• Judicial Review: Challenging legal errors in a Federal Court of Appeals.

Courts have the power to order the government to facilitate the return of wrongfully deported individuals to the U.S. so they can receive the proper due process they were initially denied.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

It is not an appeal if you are deported without a hearing.
It is not due process if you are deported without a hearing.

Nope, that is the crux of the issue.
That people are getting deported without due process

False

You are just misusing words out of context and asking AI. lmfao.
As I said, due process needs to be provided BEFORE deportation.
Asking to reopen your case after you are out of the country, is not an appeal.
You are not appealing a removal order at that point because it wasn't issued by a judge.
You were removed without one, which is why it is a violation of due process in the first place

And false

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Since you have so much trouble and trust Google AI a lot, here is a short summary from AI:

Deportation Without a Removal Order is a Due Process Violation
Deporting an immigrant without a proper removal order and a legal hearing is a violation of due process rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment.
Why it's a violation:

• Right to Notice and a Hearing: Due process requires the government to provide formal notice of charges and an opportunity for a hearing before an impartial immigration judge.
• Protection Against Arbitrary Action: The formal process safeguards individuals from being deported arbitrarily or mistakenly (e.g., mistaken identity of a U.S. citizen).
• Established Precedent: Supreme Court precedent confirms all persons on U.S. soil are entitled to this protection.

Challenging an Illegal Deportation: Remedy vs. Due Process
An immigrant can pursue legal action to challenge a deportation that occurred without a removal order.
Is this challenge due process or a remedy?
It is a remedy, which is the legal mechanism used to correct the initial violation of due process.

Term	Definition	Application in this case
Due Process	The right to a fair and formal procedure guaranteed by the Constitution.	This right was violated when the deportation occurred without a hearing/order.
Remedy	The legal enforcement mechanism used after a right has been violated to restore justice.	This is the challenge filed in federal court (e.g., Habeas Corpus, Motion to Reopen) to fix the violation.

Legal Avenues for a Remedy:

• Habeas Corpus Petition: Filed in federal court to challenge unlawful removal.
• Motion to Reopen Proceedings: Filed with immigration courts/BIA arguing fundamental error.
• Judicial Review: Challenging legal errors in a Federal Court of Appeals.

Courts have the power to order the government to facilitate the return of wrongfully deported individuals to the U.S. so they can receive the proper due process they were initially denied.

There's no evidence that Trump is rounding up brown people, and deporting them without due process.

You continuously post total bullshit

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

False
And false

Translation: I have exhausted all my mental gymnastics moves, but I am going to pretend that I didn't just facepalm.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

There's no evidence that Trump is rounding up brown people, and deporting him without due process.
You continuously post total bullshit

Yes, am sure he is going after the illegal Norwegians lmfao.
Did you not watch his deportation show on Dr. Phil's now bankrupt Merit TV? lmfao.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Yes, am sure he is going after the illegal Norwegians lmfao

Trump did exactly that. Do you ever get tired of being wrong??!!

Norwegians included in Trump’s deportation plan | Norway's News in English — www.newsinenglish.no

www.newsinenglish.no

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

It's been fun, but now you have to excuse me, I have to go to the liquor store for tonight's booze.

Debate to be continued at a later time and date

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Trump did exactly that. Do you ever get tired of being wrong??!!

Norwegians included in Trump’s deportation plan | Norway's News in English — www.newsinenglish.no

www.newsinenglish.no

Yes, the 39 Norwegians vs the what 100s of thousands people of colour he has racially profiled and targeted. Sure.
Your preferred AI summary below:

Reporting from 2025 indicates that the Trump administration's deportation efforts and rhetoric have disproportionately affected communities of color and those from specific non-European countries, leading to widespread accusations of racial bias and targeting.

Policy and Rhetoric
The administration has not explicitly stated a policy of targeting people based on race. Instead, the focus is described as targeting all individuals in the U.S. illegally, as well as those with criminal records (which in practice includes many minor offenses). However, the specific actions and rhetoric employed have led to significant controversy:

• Targeted Nationalities: The administration has specifically focused on ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and parole programs for hundreds of thousands of immigrants from countries like Haiti, Venezuela, Honduras, Guatemala, Afghanistan, Cameroon, and Somalia. These actions primarily impact non-white populations.
• Dehumanizing Language: President Trump has used highly charged language targeting specific groups. In December 2025, he repeatedly referred to Somali immigrants as "garbage" and stated, "We don't want 'em in our country," which critics argue legitimates bigotry and contributes to an atmosphere of fear in those communities.
• Expansion of Enforcement: The administration has ramped up immigration enforcement in cities with large non-white immigrant populations, such as Los Angeles and Minneapolis. A September 2025 Supreme Court decision lifted restrictions on certain enforcement tactics in Los Angeles that lower courts had found likely violated the Fourth Amendment by allowing agents to target suspects based primarily on race or ethnicity.

Outcomes and Criticisms

• Racial Profiling Allegations: Civil rights organizations and legal experts argue that the administration's aggressive enforcement tactics, such as raids in predominantly Latino neighborhoods and the use of the National Guard, amount to racial profiling.
• Focus on Non-Criminals: While the administration claims it is focusing on serious criminals, data analysis from 2025 shows that a majority of those arrested in recent operations had no criminal convictions.
• Legal Challenges: The administration has faced numerous legal challenges regarding the use of broad and subjective criteria for deportation, such as a "non-compatible with Western Civilization" clause in a proposed executive order, which critics fear could be a pretext for denaturalizing people for any reason.

Advocates, including the ACLU and Human Rights Watch, contend that the overall effect of these policies and actions is an openly discriminatory system that disproportionately harms communities of color.

 

[Valcazar]

No.
That is like saying if someone is suspected of committing murder, they should first be sentenced to life in prison without trial and then they can appeal that sentence if they want.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly how he thinks it should work.
Well, for those people, anyway.

That is not how due process works.
Due process is provided before a removal.
Any request to reopen your case after one is out of the country is a remedy, not fulfillment of due process requirements before removal.
This is not semantics. This is a very important difference.

I'd include remedies as part of due process if they are in the context of contesting a decision.
But at that point I would be splitting hairs.

 

[Valcazar]

And here is the final nail in @Valcazar and @Shaquille Oatmeal 's argument.
Both these guys claim that Trump's policies have led to either an increase in US citizens being illegally deported, or are not following deportation proceedings properly.

I did a search and a study was done in 2011 that concluded roughly 1 to 1.5 percent of all removals were US citizens.
So mistakes like this was were happening well before Trump took office. And Trump has actually wrongfully deported less than that, assuming the 70 people number is correct

Read and weep:

Google Search

Right back to the AI, I see.

You really have a lot of confidence in something you don't understand, don't you?

First thing you should learn is to not compare apples and oranges.
This is an academic study.
This is a GAO report. (Can also be classified as a study.)

They are not looking at the same thing, for the same purpose, with the same (or even similar) data.

But, since I know you won't believe me, here is Professor Stevens commenting on what Trump's moves mean.

Jacqueline Stevens, deportation law expert: ‘What Trump is saying is not new; the government has been deporting US citizens for decades’

The Northwestern University political scientist is not surprised that the president wants to imprison citizens in El Salvador

english.elpais.com

 

[Valcazar]

This is simply not true. Nobody is getting deported without due prcoess.
You're just making shit up now

Show us your AI searches on the subject.

 

[mandrill]

Sad, sad, sad old Alzheimer Grandpa......