8 hours ago, mattwill said:

Sounds like a core principle of our law that has been in place for over 800 years.

The foundations for habeas corpus predate the Magna Carta of 1215. This charter declared that:

It was a joke.

I'm very pro due process.

The joke though was that some here see due process as liberal nonsense.

still wondering when ICE is going to sweep through the somerton section?

4 hours ago, BBE said:

Once again, habeus does not apply in this way for immigration matters.

That’s an interesting comment. Care to elaborate on why you believe that?

Gee What a surprise. Civil Rights lawsuit.

The Trump administration’s MS-13 case against Kilmar Abrego Garcia crumbled in court

Before the Trump administration finally returned Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the U.S. this month, officials kept claiming he belonged to the deadly MS-13 gang. Even if true, that wouldn’t have been a valid reason for the government to avoid compliance with a court order for his return after illegally sending him to El Salvador in March.

But in any event, it shouldn’t escape notice that a federal judge just picked apart the gang claim that the Justice Department has continued to push since his return.

That picking-apart came in Sunday’s ruling that rejected the DOJ’s bid to detain Abrego ahead of trial on criminal charges the government had waiting for him upon his return. He pleaded not guilty to allegations of illegally transporting undocumented immigrants. (U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes’ opinion Sunday noted that his preferred surname is "Abrego,” after he has been consistently referred to in court documents and reports as "Abrego Garcia.”)

there were no signs or markings, including tattoos, indicating that Abrego is an MS-13 member.” Given the conflicting evidence, the judge wrote, "the government’s evidence of Abrego’s alleged gang membership is simply insufficient.”

17 minutes ago, mattwill said:

That’s an interesting comment. Care to elaborate on why you believe that?

Because it is established law. As I stated earlier, habeus applies in immigration after detention. One has to be detained first and only then can an Article III court case on habeus corpus grounds be filed.

On 6/13/2025 at 10:55 PM, mattwill said:

It moves the needle in a balanced Supply/Demand scenario, but the reality of the majority of housing markets in the US is that they are out of balance, with Demand significantly outstripping Supply. That is why the suggestion of @TEW is the only kind of change to either Supply or Demand that is capable of moving the needle … a massive change. But as I pointed out earlier, TEW’s massive population change comes with consequences in lots of parts of the Economy other than Housing.

Another factor that makes your "next bracket fills” argument unlikely is the increased and increasing entry into the market of institutional investors adding a new component of Demand. Those institutional investors are buying homes with the express purpose of transforming them from owner-occupancy into renter-occupancy. That new component of Demand is doubly "strong” in its upward pressure on sales prices. Since it is new, incremental Demand, that puts upward pressure on prices. But in addition institutional Demand is much more price elastic than individual Demand is. Said another way, institutional investors are much better able to handle price increases than individuals are. The reason for that is that if an institutional investor has to pay $50,000 more to purchase a house then they simply increase the rent they are asking for the house, but if an individual buyer has to pay $50,000 more for the house there is no one to pass that additional cost on to. It probably means a $50,000 increase in their mortgage amount borrowed.

Bottom- line, our society’s decision to look at housing as an investment with desired Return on Investment has created the affordability issues we face.

Exactly.

The use of single family housing as a financial vehicle has been a total disaster. It was a disaster in 2008 and it’s a disaster now.

Throw in 20-30 million extra permanent renters to the demand pool and it only further incentivizes the conversion of single family homes into investment vehicles.

My take is that corporations should be banned from buying them. I believe individuals are allowed to have up to 10 personal home mortgages — allow that as a ladder for small land lords to build up wealth before moving into apartment buildings. But this idea that entire neighborhoods or even towns are being built to rent is an abomination.

Get rid of the illegals to crush rent and home purchase prices while forcing up median and bottom quintile wages. Yes it will involve a lot of pain along the way, but the path we are on is a dystopian nightmare.

2 hours ago, BBE said:

Because it is established law. As I stated earlier, habeus applies in immigration after detention. One has to be detained first and only then can an Article III court case on habeus corpus grounds be filed.

However, the duration of the detention is being orchestrated to be of such short duration that the right to an Article Iii court case is being denied.

What is the probable cause for pulling up to a landscape crew and demanding documents?

EDIT: I have been guilty in my comments of co mingling Habeas corpus and probable cause. The following description explains how they are different. "In essence: Habeas corpus is a tool to challenge unlawful detention, while probable cause is the standard that must be met to justify the initial act of detention. One deals with the legality of continued custody, and the other with the justification for initiating that custody in the first”

3 minutes ago, TEW said:

Get rid of the illegals to crush rent and home purchase prices

Yeah about that...

Immigrants entering the country illegally make up about 23% of the construction laborer workforce in the United States, according to a 2021 report from the Center for American Progress. A Pew Research Center study pegged that share at 15% for all workers in construction jobs.

Construction Dive

A fifth of construction workers lack permanent legal stat...

Illegal immigration has dominated the headlines during this election season, but building pros are calling for help to get skilled workers to jobsites.

6 hours ago, BBE said:

We are solidly Fed until Miller is gone.

Immigration enforcement was bad enough. It was practically eliminated over the last four years. That's what is "solidly Fed".

19 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

Not you specifically, but others have said today that people who voted for Trump didn't vote for this.

So the same people who think Trump voters are idiots and can't understand why people would ever vote for Trump or why people would still support him are suddenly Trump voter whispers who understand them enough to speak on their behalf.

Some of you are idiots... all of you are fascists.

Yesterday the supreme court ruled that Trump can deport anyone to Sudan of all places. Imagine being some gardener from Mexico who has lived here for 20 years and suddenly your thrown in to an unmarked van by a bunch of thugs and 15 hours later you're in war torn Sudan in the middle of a genocide. All of you are terrible people.

Just now, Gannan said:

Some of you are idiots... all of you are fascists.

Yesterday the supreme court ruled that Trump can deport anyone to Sudan of all places. Imagine being some gardener from Mexico who has lived here for 20 years and suddenly your thrown in to an unmarked van by a bunch of thugs and 15 hours later you're in war torn Sudan in the middle of a genocide. All of you are terrible people.

Sounds good. You are still cool.

6 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Yeah about that...

Immigrants entering the country illegally make up about 23% of the construction laborer workforce in the United States, according to a 2021 report from the Center for American Progress. A Pew Research Center study pegged that share at 15% for all workers in construction jobs.

Construction Dive

A fifth of construction workers lack permanent legal stat...

Illegal immigration has dominated the headlines during this election season, but building pros are calling for help to get skilled workers to jobsites.

And?

We’ve already established that new homes are actually bad for affordability since developers can only make money on premium/luxury builds; cheaper starter homes aren’t being built because there’s no money on it. This then causes existing home prices to increase, as local market comps become equated with the new luxury builds.

Simply put you’re never going to build your way out of this. It’s an argument that is dead on arrival. The only solution is to shrink the demand pool by getting rid of illegals by the tens of millions. This will also increase wages of the poorer brackets of Americans.

Of course there’s no free lunch and construction, along with many service based businesses, will become more expensive. It is what it is.

To think that anyone ever took him seriously to begin with

15 minutes ago, mattwill said:

However, the duration of the detention is being orchestrated to be of such short duration that the right to an Article Iii court case is being denied.

What is the probable cause for pulling up to a landscape crew and demanding documents?

EDIT: I have been guilty in my comments of co mingling Habeas corpus and probable cause. The following description explains how they are different. "In essence: Habeas corpus is a tool to challenge unlawful detention, while probable cause is the standard that must be met to justify the initial act of detention. One deals with the legality of continued custody, and the other with the justification for initiating that custody in the first”

It is actually within the domain of ICE to request documentation from any employer via E-verify. Companies that use primarily day laborers, your landscapers don't file and have a tendency to employ illegals. There is your reason.

How it is being done is an issue. Deporting without a hearing in front of an immigration judge is a problem. Processes are there and need to be followed. If followed there is no need for Article III courts to intervene. This administration is cutting corners. That is the problem. It is not that they are enforcing immigration law that is the problem.

4 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

To think that anyone ever took him seriously to begin with

You understand this is the reality of the home construction market, right?

Cope laughing and dismissal doesn’t change reality.

2 minutes ago, TEW said:

You understand this is the reality of the home construction market, right?

Cope laughing and dismissal doesn’t change reality.

Oh I fully understand that the laws of supply and demand cease to exist as soon as they become inconvenient to your argument

19 hours ago, mattwill said:

You have chosen an apt metaphor for housing. Let’s look at that forest of yours. Housing in the US is very much like the forests of the US. The isn’t one homogeneous transcontinental forest, but rather many different regional (and local) forests. The forest(s) here in Northern California are very different from the forest in Eastern Pennsylvania and Delaware. Heck the Pine Barren forest of South Jersey is very different from those neighboring forests in Eastern PA and Delaware.

Bottom-line there is no monolithic housing "forest.”

Ah, so there are a multitude of regional variations that exist, as I have been saying? It's almost as if the large amount of regional variations prove the lack of existence of some overarching national financial policy that is causing this problem, as you have stated.

19 hours ago, mattwill said:

Ish government policy? Do you understand the history of how zoning was put into place in almost all communities? It wasn’t through top-down governmental action. It was from bottom-up meetings of neighbors. It was democracy in action. Local governments (and all zoning is local) simply became the oversight vehicle for enforcing the zoning decisions that the residents came to consensus on.

If you are going to point fingers, at least you should point them at the correct villain.

Me: Makes a meme blaming the voters.

You: Blames the voters, chastises me for somehow not correctly blaming the voters.

19 hours ago, mattwill said:

Such a map overlay doesn’t have to be just for Delaware. The picture is the same from coast to coast, and the reason is Return On Investment (ROI) for the developers/builders. It is simple economics that purchasing a piece of property to build on is much cheaper if the property does not have existing houses on it. Further, if a developer does purchase a redevelopment property, there is the additional cost of tearing down the existing structures. As a result, the costs to build are much higher than on undeveloped land. So nothing is torpedoed. Your map argument is interesting and factually correct, but irrelevant.

I’m sorry you find having a simple economic and governmental and societal discussion so demeaning. I suspect that is your problem, not mine

The barriers for aren't costs, they're zoning and regulatory.

In places with a housing shortage, a developer expects higher revenue from their product, thus they can eat higher initial costs and still come out with a good return. The ROI is proportional to both ends of the investment, not just the initial.

In places like California, the NPO-industrial complex runs your state, so you have stupid requirements for housing that make it unfeasible on top of the moronic zoning requirements. But hey I'm sure those roof top gardens will really help the poors, and not things like, I dunno, increasing new volume for mid-level product that in turn pushes existing mid-level volume down towards low-level availability.

It's almost like you've only dealt with business in theory and not in practice.

I'm sure your students eat this drivel up, but the real world doesn't work like that.

16 minutes ago, TEW said:

This will also increase wages of the poorer brackets of Americans.

18 minutes ago, TEW said:

And?

We’ve already established that new homes are actually bad for affordability since developers can only make money on premium/luxury builds; cheaper starter homes aren’t being built because there’s no money on it. This then causes existing home prices to increase, as local market comps become equated with the new luxury builds.

Simply put you’re never going to build your way out of this. It’s an argument that is dead on arrival. The only solution is to shrink the demand pool by getting rid of illegals by the tens of millions. This will also increase wages of the poorer brackets of Americans.

Of course there’s no free lunch and construction, along with many service based businesses, will become more expensive. It is what it is.

While the "luxury" new builds don't fix the problems, they still open up existing inventory for the steps below. It's not a lot, but it moves the needle.

There's still places where development is happening. In Florida I can assure you that it's northerners driving up the market, and not illegals. They've always been here, wrt Florida's ag industry. (There's not a lot of automation in berries and cattle.)

There's a lot of new actual luxury properties going up all over the place, but there's still a ton of regular run of the mill apartment complexes and housing developments being built. (The signs still say luxury, but the price points and the beige carpet/white walls indicate otherwise.)

Iranians arrested.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ice-arrests-11-iranian-nationals-48-hours/

6 minutes ago, Talkingbirds said:

Iranians arrested.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ice-arrests-11-iranian-nationals-48-hours/

If my math is correct, 25-8=17.

Who was POTUS in 2017??

The Department of Homeland Security says Yousef Mehridehno had been living in America illegally for nearly 8 years when federal authorities determined he lied on a visa application. Roughly four months after the Iranian foreign national was added to the U.S. known or suspected terrorist list in February, he was apprehended by federal agents Sunday in central Mississippi, just outside of Jackson. 

3 minutes ago, Lambo said:

If my math is correct, 25-8=17.

Who was POTUS in 2017??

yeah, that was obama's fault. what the hell was poor trump supposed to do? sign an EO ?

1 hour ago, Lambo said:

Who was POTUS in 2017??

That would be President Donald J Trump. My point was that they rounded up Iranians thought to be a security risks.

44 minutes ago, Talkingbirds said:

That would be President Donald J Trump. My point was that they rounded up Iranians thought to be a security risks.

I understood your point, did you understand mine?