Law alien enemies act grants LEO permission to enter a home without a warrant.

Nope. Now you're just making shit up. It clearly says in the memo...

"Trump administration officials directed law enforcement nationwide to pursue suspected gang members into their homes..."

... as they should since it's been the confirmed law of the land since 1976. Are you suggesting Illegal Alien criminals are not subject to U.S. laws?

Bro, as you and me both know citing law to a bunch of fascists is as useless as tits on a turtle. While you cite law and explain how it applies, the response will never present arguments against that law but just dictate that the law doesn't matter and just continue parroting the media lies.

Sotomayor, in a recent SCOTUS opinion.

GoBcIROWgAAwLkF
Holy shit, you are seriously a disgraceful, shameless, fucking idiot. It is extremely sad this is the best attempt you have to support your agenda. That is in no way a SCOTUS opinion your attempt to present it as such is yet another example of the absolutely despicable lies and lengths liberals resort to trying to fool people to support their treason.

What you quoted is the farthest thing from a SCOTUS opinion, it is in fact a dissenting statement. To explain for your audience, that means it is the argument rejected by the SCOTUS, the actual opposite of the SCOTUS opinion.
 
Holy shit, you are seriously a disgraceful, shameless, fucking idiot. It is extremely sad this is the best attempt you have to support your agenda. That is in no way a SCOTUS opinion your attempt to present it as such is yet another example of the absolutely despicable lies and lengths liberals resort to trying to fool people to support their treason.

This is amazing, thank you. A perfect demonstration of how someone's right-wing MAGA voter on Friday night is another's despicable treasonous liberal by Sunday morning.

😌

Shitdog Schizos Strike Again.

{<jordan}

What you quoted is the farthest thing from a SCOTUS opinion, it is in fact a dissenting statement. To explain for your audience, that means it is the argument rejected by the SCOTUS, the actual opposite of the SCOTUS opinion.

It's a dissenting opinion to a majority ruling, relax.
 
I for one would gladly give away all of my constitutional protections under the guise of fighting one of the greatest horrors and injustices to humanity the world has ever seen, street gangs! lol
 
Bro, as you and me both know citing law to a bunch of fascists is as useless as tits on a turtle. While you cite law and explain how it applies, the response will never present arguments against that law but just dictate that the law doesn't matter and just continue parroting the media lies.
He didn't "cite the law" the cited a fucking usatoday article, also the memo is not law, its a fucking memo.

And nowhere in the memo is the word pursue or pursuit used.
 
Wow, amazing looking dogs. I want one.
- They're amazing dogs, pretty good with kids. If you ever get the chance to own a fila, they`re gentle giants with their families, they just dont like outsiders. The camperos is a little smaller, maxium weight close to 50 kgs and shorter, but are pretty rare, i hope the breed gets more widespread!
 
- Or a guard dog attacks them as they should! A living creature house is sacred. Btw, you americans should buy Filas and Dog campeiros:

images


images


They're bigger, stronger and more trusteable than pitbulls.

I love that the brasiliero just looks like a bloodhounds face stuck on a mastiff body. I hear they're great guard dogs but they are both banned here. Along with tosa inus and argentinos and a few others.

With our climate I'm partial to the South African boerboels, there's a few around and they do quite well in the heat, great with family, kids, great instincts and incredible guard dogs.
 
It’s a memo from the attorney general.

That's the point, these people are just using a memo to ignore the Constitution and MAGAturds here are trying to spin it because deep down, even when they have won, they still want to be seen as the "good guys" against "totalitarian libs and wokesters".

Whippy and that other turd are in a real "Are we the baddies" moment right now.

bg,f8f8f8-flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1000,f8f8f8.jpg
 
That's the point, these people are just using a memo to ignore the Constitution and MAGAturds here are trying to spin it because deep down, even when they have won, they still want to be seen as the "good guys" against "totalitarian libs and wokesters".

Whippy and that other turd are in a real "Are we the baddies" moment right now.

bg,f8f8f8-flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1000,f8f8f8.jpg
It’s a hard one to justify. Ignoring it is surely easier for them
 
Before I read what everyone else has to say, I want to get my thoughts in. Dangerous on so many levels. The fourth amendment is crying right now. I am not against the deportation of dangerous shit head gang members, but I think they should be the ones where there is no question they belong to one of these gangs. ms13 fucks with the face tats and gang tats covering their bodies are easier to spot. If they are here illegally and come into contact with law enforcement, good. But to walk down the street and see a “potential gang member” or someone who may look like one -I.e Hispanic male with tattoos that does not appear to be legal DOES NOT GIVE OFFICERS REASONABLE ARTICULABLE SUSPICION to stop and detain someone. Unless officers know the person by name and knows their gang affiliation. But I am so against warrant less searches and the lack of a due process under the 5th and 14th amendments. It’s going to lead to mistakes and likely a lot of them if this continues.


Again, my strong preference is for officers to end up arresting some twat gang member for something else-theft, robbery, violence, etc and then verify the gang and immigration status and then start the procedure, but I don’t want to see officers knocking on a door because Hispanic people live there and they have a hunch that they’re here illegally. Man, is that ripe for abuse on so many levels.
 
Perhaps you guys should familiarize yourselves with United States v. Santana (1976), where the Supreme Court upheld this type of warrantless entry during a pursuit.

I know what you are saying, but this article didn’t make it seem like this was involving hot pursuit and exigencies that do not involve the fourth amendment. My fears aren’t that they are going to use this on me or mine, but they will eventually and deport an actual citizen born and raised here, if they haven’t already. I am all for fast deportations when you have an illegal that is committing crimes left and right, but there has to be due process involved. Maybe try out some ankle monitoring for this purpose. If they cut them off and are even encountered again, immediately deport then. Or hold the ones that are suspected of being violent gang members until it can be verified.
 
I know what you are saying, but this article didn’t make it seem like this was involving hot pursuit and exigencies that do not involve the fourth amendment. My fears aren’t that they are going to use this on me or mine, but they will eventually and deport an actual citizen born and raised here, if they haven’t already. I am all for fast deportations when you have an illegal that is committing crimes left and right, but there has to be due process involved. Maybe try out some ankle monitoring for this purpose. If they cut them off and are even encountered again, immediately deport then. Or hold the ones that are suspected of being violent gang members until it can be verified.

Sure it's a valid concern... and dumb ass cops pull that shit all the time right now. If they do it, get the cameras out. It's big $.

The article specifically mentioned "pursuit"... so that was the thought on the whole event.
 
Back
Top