Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

The Eagles Message Board

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Featured Replies

To break this down, I agree that Rubio has appeared reasonable regarding his authority. The various revocations are case by case with an absolute no on what happened with the Venezuelans (argued that thoroughly with diehard).

I tend to favor the laws as interpreted regarding detention.   

Where this gets problematic is that due process even in removal hearings cannot be accurately applied as the court does not have the authority to confer legal immigration status outside of ruling the revocation of the visa to be improper which starts a whole new set of issues as the law is clear regarding where the authority lies.

  • Replies 14.4k
  • Views 258.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

Posted Images

7 minutes ago, Bill said:

Was it before or after the part in the article where it was written about immigrants having due process rights?

How would you define due process?

Just now, Gannan said:

So you're argument is that should their visa get revoked, they should be allowed to stay here? That's what you're going with?

Here comes the obtuse/disingenuous part.  We've been over this point many times in here.  They can be deported but need to receive due process first.  You keep focusing everything on the visa but continually miss the other items of detention and deportation.

I also agree 100% with Vikas in that there should be a ruling by SCOTUS requiring a legal hearing for the removal of a student visa and basing that on the 5th.

Just now, Gannan said:

For criminal charges. The fun part about arguing with you is that you just skip over the parts that don't fit your narrative. 

Here's the part you are missing. Yes, they can revoke a visa. But they certainly can't detain someone without due process. So we revoke the visa and the person doesn't leave -- then they are an illegal immigrant and have due process rights before being deported.

Revoking a visa isn't the same thing as deportation/detention.

1 minute ago, Gannan said:

For criminal charges. The fun part about arguing with you is that you just skip over the parts that don't fit your narrative. 

No, due process is not solely predicated on criminal charges.

A person being detained by the state must be afforded due process of the law.

 

You don’t even know what you’re talking about.

Just now, DrPhilly said:

Here comes the obtuse/disingenuous part.  We've been over this point many times in here.  They can be deported but need to receive due process first.  You keep focusing everything on the visa but continually miss the other items of detention and deportation.

I also agree 100% with Vikas in that there should be a ruling by SCOTUS requiring a legal hearing for the removal of a student visa and basing that on the 5th.

Once the visa is revoked, they are here illegally. This isn't complicated. If you're argument is that people on expired vasas can stay here indefinitely unless a court rules its ok to deport them, your argument is more faulty than it originally appeared. Under your logic, people can just come here on a visa, let it expire and if they can evade the courts...stay here forever. It's arguments like this which have given us 2 terms of Trump. 

The argument that we can't deny entry to a foreigner with ties to terrorism is such a flawed argument, it practically screams for a 3rd Trump term. 

 

Awkward if true

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Here's the part you are missing. Yes, they can revoke a visa. But they certainly can't detain someone without due process. So we revoke the visa and the person doesn't leave -- then they are an illegal immigrant and have due process rights before being deported.

Revoking a visa isn't the same thing as deportation/detention.

It is kind of interesting but in the end of the day the implementation of the overall consequences on a person who has had their visa revoked cannot be carried out by the govt without due process.

1 minute ago, Gannan said:

Once the visa is revoked, they are here illegally. This isn't complicated. If you're argument is that people on expired vasas can stay here indefinitely unless a court rules its ok to deport them, your argument is more faulty than it originally appeared. Under your logic, people can just come here on a visa, let it expire and if they can evade the courts...stay here forever. It's arguments like this which have given us 2 terms of Trump. 

The argument that we can't deny entry to a foreigner with ties to terrorism is such a flawed argument, it practically screams for a 3rd Trump term. 

 

Um...you can't deport people right now without due process dude. They get to make their case to an immigration judge if they choose. ICE can detain them, but they have a right to a hearing in front of an immigration judge before removal.

https://www.usa.gov/deportation-process 

Just now, vikas83 said:

Um...you can't deport people right now without due process dude. They get to make their case to an immigration judge if they choose. ICE can detain them, but they have a right to a hearing in front of an immigration judge before removal.

https://www.usa.gov/deportation-process 

There are exceptions for expedited deportations. I am guessing that is what the Trump administration is doing here. 

11 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

So if Rubio rescinds the visa of a student here, they would have to voluntarily leave. If they don't, then they would be here illegally and I guess could be detained at that point. But they couldn't be detained until after (i) they were notified of the revocation and (ii) did not leave willingly. How long do they have to leave? No clue.

...and they would receive a level of "due process" before they are actually deported.

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Um...you can't deport people right now without due process dude. They get to make their case to an immigration judge if they choose. ICE can detain them, but they have a right to a hearing in front of an immigration judge before removal.

https://www.usa.gov/deportation-process 

Would have found out that guy shouldn't have been deported if they followed the rules :rolleyes:

But they publicly don't care and will lie

in the case of Dr. Hezbollah I believe the argument is that she lied or misrepresented facts upon reentry therefore fits under those exceptions. 

1 minute ago, DrPhilly said:

...and they would receive a level of "due process" before they are actually deported.

Unless they fit under an exemption. 

:roll:wtf?

3 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Once the visa is revoked, they are here illegally. This isn't complicated. If you're argument is that people on expired vasas can stay here indefinitely unless a court rules its ok to deport them, your argument is more faulty than it originally appeared. Under your logic, people can just come here on a visa, let it expire and if they can evade the courts...stay here forever. It's arguments like this which have given us 2 terms of Trump. 

The argument that we can't deny entry to a foreigner with ties to terrorism is such a flawed argument, it practically screams for a 3rd Trump term. 

 

Dude, just stop.  They CANNOT BE DEPORTED without due process.  So yeah, they can come on a visa, overstay their visa and then be deported thru a legal process.  That is exactly what happens and it isn't complicated.  A simple hearing.

Where are you coming up with "entry"?  That's a totally different thing than "deport".  You don't have to like it but that is the law.

Just now, DrPhilly said:

Dude, just stop.  They CANNOT BE DEPORTED without due process.  So yeah, they can come on a visa, overstay their visa and then be deported thru a legal process.  That is exactly what happens and it isn't complicated.  A simple hearing.

Where are you coming up with "entry"?  That's a totally different thing than "deport".  You don't have to like it but that is the law.

Yes they can. If you want to say that the Trump administration is stretching the rules to the exemptions...what else is new? 

6 minutes ago, Gannan said:

There are exceptions for expedited deportations. I am guessing that is what the Trump administration is doing here. 

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/expedited-removal#:~:text=Expedited removal is a process,entered by sea without inspection.

Expedited removal does not apply to people who live here on a visa and have had their visa revoked. 

"Created in 1996 as part of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, the expedited removal statute applies to noncitizens who arrive at a port of entry and to some noncitizens who enter without having been admitted or paroled (those who "enter without inspection”) and who have not been continuously present in the United States for at least two years. "

1 minute ago, DrPhilly said:

 

Where are you coming up with "entry"?  

This is the case that started this entire exchange today. It was when she left the country and came back that started it all

Quote

Deported Brown University doctor acknowledged she attended Hezbollah leader’s funeral on visit to Lebanon, source says

 
By Andy Rose and Gloria Pazmino, CNN
 6 minute read 
Updated 10:13 PM EDT, Mon March 17, 2025
CNN — 

A Brown University assistant professor and doctor was deported over the weekend from Boston to Lebanon after federal agents found photos of former Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Iran’s supreme leader on her cell phone, a source familiar with the case told CNN.

Following Dr. Rasha Alawieh’s return Thursday from a visit to Lebanon, federal agents at Boston Logan International Airport found the photos, the source familiar said. It was not immediately clear why officers were examining her phone.

The existence of the photos was outlined in a court filing Monday obtained by CNN affiliate WCVB. "In explaining why these multiple photos were deleted by her one to two days before she arrived at Logan Airport, Dr. Alawieh stated that she did not want to give authorities the perception that she supports Hezbollah and the Ayatollah politically or militarily,” the filing reads, per WCVB.

"I think if you listen to one of his sermons, you would know what I mean,” Alawieh allegedly told the agents, according to WCVB’s copy of the filing. "He is a religious, spiritual person. As I said, he has very high value. His teachings are about spirituality and morality.”

Alawieh, 34, acknowledged to federal agents she attended Nasrallah’s February 23 funeral – a public event attended by thousands – during her visit, said the source.

"Our client is in Lebanon, and we’re not going to stop fighting to get her back in the US to see her patients, and we’re also going to make sure that the government follows the rule of law,” Stephanie Marzouk, an attorney representing Alawieh’s family in a federal complaint fighting the deportation, told reporters Monday outside a Boston courthouse.

Alawieh described Nasrallah, who was killed last September by an Israeli airstrike in Beirut, to the officers as a highly regarded religious leader and told them she follows his religious and spiritual techniques but not his politics, the source said.

 

Alawieh also acknowledged to immigration officers Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, according to the source. The group, which enjoys broad support among Shia Muslims across the Middle East, is a designated terror organization in the US and many other Western countries.

"Last month, Rasha Alawieh traveled to Beirut, Lebanon, to attend the funeral of Hassan Nasrallah – a brutal terrorist who led Hezbollah, responsible for killing hundreds of Americans over a four-decade terror spree,” a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said.

"A visa is a privilege not a right – glorifying and supporting terrorists who kill Americans is grounds for visa issuance to be denied. This is commonsense security,” the spokesperson added.

In a separate statement, Customs and Border Protection said foreigners traveling to the US with a visa are not guaranteed entry, adding that border patrol agents have final say on who can enter the country following security checks.

"Foreign nationals who promote extremist ideologies or carry terrorist propaganda are inadmissible to the US, plain and simple,” CBP spokesperson Hilton Beckham told CNN Monday.

The US Attorney’s Office for Massachusetts, which is representing the Trump administration in court, declined to comment.

Alawieh’s expulsion came as Republican President Donald Trump’s administration has sought to sharply restrict border crossing and ramp up immigration arrests. It came less than a week after the detention of Columbia University graduate and pro-Palestinian protest organizer Mahmoud Khalil, whose attempted deportation was put on hold by a judge.

Over the weekend, hundreds of immigrants with alleged gang ties were deported by the Trump administration, despite a judge’s order blocking their removal. The White House said the judge’s order came after the migrants, most from Venezuela, had left the US.

 

2 minutes ago, Gannan said:

There are exceptions for expedited deportations. I am guessing that is what the Trump administration is doing here. 

Sure, they can use an expedited deportation process if the situation calls for it but that process is limited to specific cases and certainly not applicable to someone in the middle of an asylum process or has already received a valid visa.

1 minute ago, Gannan said:

This is the case that started this entire exchange today. It was when she left the country and came back that started it all

You must have glossed over the exchange I had with BBE.  Denying entry for a non-citizen is perfectly legal (though can certainly be a wrong decision).  Deportation is another thing entirely.

4 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Unless they fit under an exemption. 

They don't fit under the exemption. The first rule of the exemption for expedited removal is that "The individual must have entered the U.S. without proper immigration documents." Someone who came on a visa that was subsequently revoked came to the country with valid documents.

7 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Unless they fit under an exemption. 

The people in these cases were not in that category.

22 minutes ago, Gannan said:

For criminal charges. 

 

16 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Once the visa is revoked, they are here illegally.

Look at ye, defeated by your own argument. 

Just now, Bill said:

 

Look at ye, defeated by your own argument. 

Oooorrr they are 2 separate arguments. Visas can be revoked without due process, can we finally agree on that? Because that was the original argument. Homeland security is arguing she needed a new visa all together to get back into the country

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.