TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

An individual, a citizen of El Salvador, was illegally in the U.S. and was returned to his country, which is standard deportation procedure. The foreign policy of the U.S. is conducted by the president, not by a court. The Supreme Court stated that no court has the authority to compel a foreign policy function in the U.S. The speaker claims that President Trump's policy is to expel foreign terrorists who are here illegally. The speaker asks why it isn't stated that keeping criminals out of the country is a positive thing, and accuses the previous speaker of lacking credibility.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 are at a location in Florida, discussing the presence of noncitizens on federal property. Speaker 1 asks why noncitizens are allowed in the US while American citizens are not. Speaker 0 questions who is prohibiting them from being there and thanks Speaker 1 for their question. Speaker 1 reiterates their question and Speaker 0 explains that as Americans, they have the right to be on a public bridge under the first amendment.

Most non-citizens at the US border are not eligible to stay. Asylum laws don't cover economic reasons or general violence. Migrants can be detained until removal, but some may be released temporarily if they pass screening and vetting. They must check in with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement regularly and may wear ankle monitors. The government doesn't provide financial support, and non-citizens must report their addresses. If eligible, an immigration judge may grant asylum or other forms of protection.

If a crime is committed by illegal immigrants, there should be an investigation. The federal government will find every illegal alien who is stealing American taxpayer dollars. If IRS investigators find illegal aliens stealing taxpayer money, they'll be referred to ICE and Homeland Security investigations. We shouldn't let illegal aliens steal taxpayer dollars. Millions of illegal aliens have stolen Social Security, using fake Social Security numbers and identities, which are felonies. They will be investigated, prosecuted, and deported. When those deportations occur, Americans will get jobs, tenants, and houses. If a crime has been committed, they'll be referred. If prosecution and deportation are justified, they will occur based on existing IRS protocols. No one is given immunity anymore. Illegal aliens freely stealing billions of taxpayer dollars should not be above the law.

The Supreme Court denied, seven to two, the Trump administration's request to swiftly resume deportations of Venezuelan nationals using the Alien and Enemies Act from 1798, which requires believing the U.S. is under invasion. Trump claimed the courts are stopping him from fighting the "invasion of illegal alien criminals." The court is upholding due process by sending the case back to a lower court. While 88% of Americans believe Trump should abide by the Supreme Court, Trump will likely continue using creative measures to address illegal immigration, which he believes the last administration caused. Trump's policies are working, with apprehensions at the border decreasing from 2.25 million in February 2023 to 7,000 in March of this year. Arrests and deportations have increased, and fentanyl deaths and violent crime are down. The debate centers on deporting individuals, including gang members, who have been in the country for years, even to countries they aren't citizens of. The Constitution grants due process to any "person," not just citizens.

An illegal alien from El Salvador, if returned to the U.S., would be arrested and deported again because there's no withholding order for a member of a foreign terrorist organization, and the gang he belongs to doesn't exist in El Salvador anymore. Even with a withholding order, he could be deported to a different country like Egypt. The speaker questions if the media knows the difference between a deportation order and a withholding order. A deportation order means a judge has ruled the individual must be deported and has no right to remain in the U.S. His only options are deportation to his home country or another country. The speaker claims the media seems to believe he could return to the U.S. and live there illegally, which is not an option. His only choices are to live in El Salvador or another country because he entered the country illegally.

Trump claims judges are overstepping by blocking his actions on immigration, accusing them of trying to assume presidential powers without voter support, which he sees as a Democratic strategy. Chuck Schumer boasted about appointing progressive judges who rule against Trump. Conservative judges defer to federal authority on immigration, while Democratic judges allegedly obstruct Trump's policies by exploiting their lifetime appointments to stall his agenda. The Alien Act of 1798 allows the president to deport criminal aliens during a declared war, invasion, or predatory incursion, and the president determines if such conditions exist. [ADVERTISEMENT] Diversify into physical gold with Birch Gold by texting Dinesh to 989898 for a free information kit. They can help convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in physical gold.

When a crime is committed, there should be an investigation. The federal government will find every illegal alien who is stealing American taxpayer dollars. If IRS investigators find illegal aliens stealing taxpayer money, they'll be referred to ICE and homeland security investigations. Illegal aliens in mass have fake Social Security numbers and fake identities, those are felonies. Why should there be an entire class in this country that is immunized from criminal prosecution and arrest for committing felonies? Yes, they will be investigated and prosecuted. Americans will get jobs, benefits, and houses. If it is found that a crime has been committed, they'll be referred. If it justifies the prosecution, they'll be prosecuted. If it justifies the deportation, they will be deported. No one is given immunity anymore. No one is given permission to break the law anymore because this is not a country if illegal aliens can freely steal billions of taxpayer dollars.

The speaker discusses a position held by some in the immigrants' rights community who advocate granting legal status to those who are in the country illegally, or at minimum pausing deportations until better laws are enacted. This view is often framed in moral terms, emphasizing compassion and the idea that people should not be punished simply for trying to earn a living. The speaker acknowledges the sincere humanitarian impulse behind this argument but asserts that such an indiscriminate approach would be unwise and unfair. First, the speaker argues that granting legal status or suspending enforcement without regard to existing laws would send a problematic signal. It would suggest to people who are considering coming to the country illegally that there will be no consequences for that decision. The speaker warns that this could lead to a surge in illegal immigration as fewer barriers or penalties are perceived to exist, encouraging more individuals to attempt entry or stay despite being in violation of the law. Second, the speaker emphasizes the existence of a global queue or waiting process for legal entry. By offering widespread legal status or de facto amnesty, the policy would overlook or sideline the millions of people around the world who are currently waiting their turn to come to the country through legal channels. This aspect highlights a sense of fairness and order in immigration policy, underscoring that legal pathways and timelines are in place for a reason and should be respected. Third, the speaker reiterates a fundamental principle about national sovereignty and governance. The United States, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and to establish laws governing residency and citizenship. This point frames immigration policy as a matter of sovereign rights and societal rules that nations set to maintain order, security, and the integrity of their legal framework. In sum, the speaker presents a cautious stance against broad, indiscriminate legalization or halting deportations, arguing that such measures would be unwise and unfair, could encourage more illegal immigration, would disregard the legal processes that many people are patiently awaiting, and would conflict with the nation’s right and obligation to regulate entry and residency.

The Supreme Court ruled on 12/10/2024 that federal courts cannot second guess visa revocations. According to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, judicial review is mandatory when a visa is initially denied, but the Department of Homeland Security can revoke a visa at any time without court review. This decision was unanimous. The Supreme Court stripped courts of the authority to review visa revocations, granting discretion to the Department of Homeland Security. Therefore, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department can revoke anyone's visa anytime, and courts are not allowed to review it. The Trump administration is allowed to revoke Mahmoud Khalil's visa and remove him from the country.

Undocumented individuals are not committing a crime by remaining in the United States, as established in the Arizona versus United States case from February 2012. Additionally, the People versus DeMarco case clarifies that local law enforcement cannot detain individuals without a judicial warrant. These cases guide our understanding of the legal framework surrounding immigration enforcement.

The speaker describes a scenario of a trendy illegal immigrant arriving at the U.S. Southwest border during the 2023 crisis, aided by taxpayer-funded NGOs, and released into the interior with a notice to appear in immigration court. He asserts the person will file a bare-bones, frivolous asylum application, aided by another NGO, and that due to a nearly 4,000,000-case immigration court backlog, the case will take years to be heard. In the meantime, the individual is said to move to a major city, receive taxpayer-funded benefits, commit crimes, be supported by sanctuary-city leadership, and be defended by Democrats who oppose strict immigration laws. The process allegedly drags on with continuances and motions, and years later an immigration judge supposedly denies the asylum claim. The individual is said to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which allegedly takes months or years, followed by appellate denial in a federal court of appeals. The speaker charges that federal departments and courts expend many taxpayer dollars on such cases, all to deport an apparently frivolous claimant. The focal policy proposal is the expedited removal of criminal aliens act, described as straightforward: criminal aliens cannot misuse the asylum system and must be detained and deported quickly if they are in the U.S. with certain criminal convictions. The speaker notes that current law already permits expedited removal for aggravated felon aliens, who are considered ineligible for asylum and relief and are presumed deportable; this is said to be constitutionally upheld by every federal court of appeals that has addressed it. The bill would expand categories of criminal aliens who may face removal proceedings when in criminal custody and authorize the Department of Homeland Security to place additional criminals in expedited removal. It would allow fast-track deportation for non-lawful permanent residents who are in a gang, transnational criminal organization, or foreign terrorist organization, or who have been convicted of dangerous crimes. The bill’s specified conviction categories include: any felony; any misdemeanor against a member of a vulnerable group; any assault on a law enforcement officer; any sexual offense; any crime of domestic violence; any stalking; any crime against children; sex trafficking or sexual exploitation of minors; sexual abuse of a minor; any activity involving child sexual exploitation; or any violation of a protective order. The term “vulnerable group” covers a child under 16, a pregnant woman, a person with severe disability, and seniors over 65. The speaker cites a poll claiming 78% of Americans support deporting illegal immigrants who have committed crimes, including nearly 70% of Democrats, and asserts broad public support for tougher immigration action while criticizing Democrats’ handling of border policy. He accuses Democrats of previously expanding border openings, cites alleged prior high border encounters, millions of entrants, and 2,000,000 “gotaways,” along with terrorists allegedly released and a record immigration court backlog, blaming the Democrats for a perceived border crisis. He argues recent House actions and votes against border-security measures and declares the bill a step toward securing the border and reforming immigration policy, urging support. He concludes by urging colleagues to back the expedited removal of criminal aliens act.

Ninety percent of people coming into the country are trying to do the right thing. Currently, some people who shouldn't be are being removed from the country, including those with visas. The goal is to keep out people who are doing bad things. Immigrants are reportedly much less likely to commit crimes than American-born citizens.

At a recent seminar, I advised Somalis in the U.S. illegally on their rights regarding deportation. If questioned by ICE, you are not required to answer. Simply state you’ve been advised by a lawyer not to answer. Providing your name, immigration status, or mode of entry isn't mandatory. Learn the laws, prepare yourselves, and avoid disclosing unnecessary information. Know your rights.

Judge Brian Murphy blocked the Trump administration's deportation of eight illegal immigrants convicted of murder, pedophilia, and sexual abuse, arguing they deserve due process. The immigrants are currently in Djibouti awaiting adjudication. One speaker argues that these individuals did not want due process when entering the country illegally, so they shouldn't get it upon deportation. They should be deported immediately, especially murderers, pedophiles, and rapists, which is what Donald Trump is doing. The speaker believes Judge Murphy cannot override Trump's agenda to keep America safe. Trump should deport these criminals quickly to protect women and children. Some countries release violent criminals into the U.S., which is a national security problem. The U.S. has the right to stand up for its freedoms, liberty, and national security.

When illegal immigrants enter the U.S., they can claim asylum at a port of entry or cross the border and request entry. Border patrol can charge them with a misdemeanor or felony, but during the last administration, they were instructed to treat it as an administrative offense. Immigrants are then released on their own recognizance with a notice to appear in court, but wait times for judges average six years. After entering the country and obtaining asylum, immigrants can apply for work authorization. Upon filing form I-765, they receive form I-766, and the Social Security Administration automatically mails them a Social Security number without an interview or ID. The system defaults to maximum inclusion and pay for these individuals with minimum collection. 1.3 million are already on Medicaid. Voter registration records show that some individuals from this population are registered to vote and have voted. These cases have been referred to the Home Ed Secure Investigation Service for prosecution.

The speaker states he cannot smuggle a terrorist into the United States, calling the question preposterous. He says they are not fond of releasing terrorists into the country, and that they turned the murder capital of the world into the safest country in the Western Hemisphere. Another speaker clarifies the individual in question is a citizen of El Salvador who was illegally in the United States and was returned to his country. He states that the foreign policy of the United States is conducted by the president, not by a court. Another speaker adds that the Supreme Court held that no court has the authority to compel the foreign policy function in the United States. He claims the policy is that foreign terrorists who are here illegally get expelled from the country.

This transcript centers on immigration, law, and due process. "This is America, man. Gotta do things the right way. That's it." "Gotta do it the right way. You wanna come here, come here legally." "I don't support illegal immigration, period. It's all there is to it." "You follow the law, man. Follow the law." He says, "due process is important... but when you come down to the immigration, it's impossible." "Not for illegals that are coming in illegal, man. That's what they did. They broke the law." They debate: "You can play that word undocumented. Illegal is illegal." They discuss Trump: "Absolutely. 100%." and "Witch hunt. Why?" "Going after criminals." Economy: "The economy's in shambles." versus "Our economy is great." "We don't base things in this country laws in the constitution on public opinion." "End of conversation. Do it legally."

When crimes are committed, investigations should occur. The federal government will find illegal aliens stealing American taxpayer dollars. If IRS investigators find illegal aliens stealing taxpayer money, they'll be referred to ICE and Homeland Security investigations. Illegal aliens use fake social security numbers and identities, which are felonies. They should not be immune from criminal prosecution and arrest for committing felonies like theft of taxpayer information, social security, and identity. If a crime has been committed, they'll be referred; if it justifies prosecution, they'll be prosecuted; if it justifies deportation, they will be deported, based on existing IRS protocols. No one is given immunity to break the law, and no class should be above the law, least of all illegal aliens who've trespassed on our territory.

There are about 1.2 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. with final removal orders from immigration judges. The September 30th memo stated that being a removable noncitizen shouldn't solely justify enforcement actions. Does this reasoning apply to those 1.2 million individuals? Yes, it does, but not all may have received due process. Should any of these individuals be removed? While it's not feasible to remove all 1.2 million, those who pose threats to public safety, national security, or border security should be removed.

I'm an immigration attorney, and I want to explain the recent changes in immigration policy. The government has expanded expedited removal nationwide. This means that if an immigration officer encounters someone undocumented, that person must prove they've been continuously present in the U.S. for at least two years. If they can't, they will be deported without a hearing. Tom Homan claims that these individuals are criminals under federal law for entering and remaining in the U.S. illegally. This is the basis for the proposed mass deportations of millions labeled as "criminals."

Florida has a significant population of illegal immigrants. The federal government refers to them as illegal aliens, which emphasizes that their presence is not just a matter of missing documentation but a violation of the law. This situation often involves intentional actions, sometimes with the assistance of cartels. The distinction between "undocumented" and "illegal" is important, as the former suggests a simple oversight, while the latter indicates a clear legal infraction.

"Crossing the border illegally is not a crime?" "No. It's not a criminal act. It's a misdemeanor." "So why are they being sent back and saying that they're breaking the law?" "That's the point." "There's no due process. Where's the evidence?" "If they are breaking the law, most people will say, okay. Then they need to go if they're criminals." "But if they're not, why are they being rounded up and sent out, especially when he promised to to deport the criminals, and now he's not doing that." "Misdemeanor is not a crime." "No. If you get charged with a misdemeanor, that's not a criminal act." "We have different levels of crime." "Everything is not the same." "It's not a crime. You're not breaking the law." "A misdemeanor is... If you're speeding, it's a misdemeanor." "That's still breaking the law." "Is it law to come over legally? There are rules that processes that you should follow." "So you're breaking rules, but you're not necessarily breaking a law." "Then you get you suffer the consequences."

Once a deportation order is issued, due process is over, having occurred prior to the judge's decision, often with NGO assistance. Over a million people are being appropriately deported. No lawyer is offered at that point. The left defends criminals over American safety and the rule of law, even defending a congresswoman who punched a police officer. This defense of criminals and attacks on law enforcement caused them to lose swing states. The Biden administration refuses to detain criminals. The left doesn't know a good guy from a bad guy, coddling violent criminals and wanting to defund ICE. Cutting a deal with Iran and destabilizing the Middle East led to the invasion of Israel. The American people rejected them because they don't know a good person from a bad one. Criminals and cartels have stopped making billions trafficking humans. Border patrol and law enforcement support these statements. Judges execute removal orders after due process.

Breaking immigration news: each of the 25 ICE field offices must make 75 arrests daily, or officers risk termination. Agents are primarily targeting individuals with serious criminal records, those with final removal orders who haven't left, and those who re-entered the U.S. without permission after a removal order. Given this increased enforcement, remember your rights. You have the right to remain silent. It's advisable to download a "Know Your Rights" card. If ICE approaches you, you can state your name, but then exercise your right to silence.