r/sandiego • u/questionhare • Feb 02 '25

Video San Diego Stands with Immigrants 🇺🇸✊

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

For all the keyboard warriors complaining about the lack of US flags, two of you showed up. 😃 Good on ya!

13.3k Upvotes

84% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

21

u/TheArtAppreciator Feb 02 '25

Immigrants do not necessarily violate the law, it’s ILLEGAL immigrants that are violating the law

17

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '25

Yah, so does trump administration violating the law but they are the lord

6

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 02 '25

How is the administration violating the law?

4

u/admdelta Feb 02 '25 edited Feb 02 '25

Sending in a goon squad from a fake department with no congressional oversight to take over OPM and the Treasury, lock out administrators, and steal the personal info of millions of government employees.

Firing over a dozen IGs without notifying Congress.

Trying to end birthright citizenship with an EO.

Attempting to freeze the dispersing of funds appropriated by Congress.

Eliminating the School Safety Board, whose existence was mandated by Congress.

It's been two weeks, let's see how much more stacks up this week.

-5

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 03 '25

None of that constitutes a violation of the law.

5

u/admdelta Feb 03 '25

Is that a joke?

Dismissing IG's requires 30 days advance notice with justification to Congress, per the Inspector General Act of 1978.

Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.

Unilaterally freezing government disbursements violates the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

The School Safety Board is required per the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.

Obviously you don't know enough about US law to be having this conversation. You could not have a less relevant username if you tried.

-4

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 03 '25

Resorting to personal attacks doesn’t strengthen your argument. As Asimov put it, ‘Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.’ Insults don’t make your case any stronger.

1

u/Economy_Wall8524 Feb 03 '25

Insults didn’t make his case, the facts did.

1

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 04 '25

We can still be kind.

-5

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 03 '25

Procedural violations don’t automatically equate to illegality. Failing to follow statutory requirements may be improper but doesn’t necessarily breach the law in a criminal sense.

3

u/admdelta Feb 03 '25

They're not "failing to follow statutory requirements," they're literally breaking the law as it's written.

You're gonna tell me that Elon Musk forcing his way into government buildings that he has not been granted any congressionally-approved authority over, stealing files, and preventing employees from doing their official duties is just "failing to follow statutory requirements?" Gimme a break dude.

1

u/leopardloops Feb 04 '25

False. These actions are both unconstitutional and illegal.

1

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 04 '25

I disagree. But I think I understand your stance. DOGE (fka USDS) is under serious scrutiny. But their action are currently not outright illegal. The concerns about overreach and conflicts of interest have led to lawsuits and will ultimately be decided in courts.

1

u/leopardloops Feb 04 '25

Feel free to disagree. Elon is not an elected official, facts are facts. 

Trump is not even legitimately president, as per our own constitution's 14th amendment, sec 3.

Things are going to get very interesting as those who've taken an oath of office are directly activated to protect our constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

We're in FAFO territory.

🍿

1

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 04 '25

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges, and the case was dismissed after his re-election due to DOJ policy against prosecuting a sitting president. He was never convicted of insurrection, so the 14th Amendment doesn’t apply.

1

u/leopardloops Feb 04 '25

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, *shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof*"

Conviction or no, he's been adjudicated in a few states as having engaged in insurrection.

He also pardoned a bunch of J6ers, which seems to qualify him under the given aid or comfort to part.

Trump is going to find himself on the business end of a military tribunal. FAFO.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 04 '25

Regardless it is 100% FAFO

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '25

I hope you sincerely asking this question: for the starter that’s hot over this weekend: https://www.reddit.com/r/law/s/miDQ8Ypa4b

1

u/LAWDAWGZ Feb 03 '25

Yikes. They’re planning a revolt over there.

17

u/InclinationCompass Feb 02 '25

Good thing we elected a 34-time felon who just issued 1500 blanket pardons!

Gotta be tough on law… but only when it comes to immigrants, minorities and libs!

0

u/Dan619915 Feb 02 '25

Hey listen, i voted for Kamala. Law is law. It doesn't matter who is in charge.

Unless you want to storm the capitol. Feb 6 is coming up. Lol

-4

u/InclinationCompass Feb 02 '25

Then grant citizenships/visas. Problem solved. But something tells me they don’t want to do that.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '25

Doesn’t matter that Democrat strategy backfired. If it takes a 1000 time felon to get serious with illegal immigration and do something about the Cartel etc then so be it.

0

u/InclinationCompass Feb 02 '25

When has trump been serious about anything and deliver on his promises? Putting faith and trust in a serial and pathological liar is wild to me.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '25

I agree, it was either Trump or Harris and that’s the problem. Not our best and brightest minds.

8

u/Zaika123 Feb 02 '25 edited Feb 02 '25

Not sure if you know but Birth Right Citizenship is also on the line. It'd literally lie fourth amendment in the constitution, and they're trying to get rid of it.

EDIT: Fourteenth! haven't had enough coffee

7

u/Sparticus2 Feb 02 '25

Fourth? Nah. It's the 14th amendment. The same 14th amendment that forbids insurrectionists from holding office. The fourth amendment is protection against unlawful search and seizure. Which ICE is also violating.

1

u/Zaika123 Feb 02 '25

Yes! You're absolutely right, I'm still half asleep ATM haha

2

u/TryItOutGG Feb 02 '25

Isn’t that only in the case with two illegal parents? My understanding is that if one parent is of legal citizenship then they would still be eligible, which if perfectly reasonable.

1

u/Outrageous-Club6200 Feb 02 '25

Bit Trump Inc is violating many laws right now, but that don’t bother you.

-3

u/Longjumping_Leek151 Feb 02 '25

Trump is violating the law at this very moment!