If the U.S. government is going to take the position that, once removed from the United States, folks can’t be brought back, then it sure seems to me that federal courts should be reflexively and categorically barring *all* removals until they’re 100 percent certain that the removals are lawful.

There are some very bad stories going around about the Mahmoud Kahlil case. The hearing today was before an immigration judge — which is located within the Justice Department. They are NOT a "federal judge" in the sense that anyone reading at least one nationwide story saying so thinks of it.

Did Aunt Lydia write this

Hello, just for reference: I’m an American and a Jew and I don’t want my government making decisions about what counts as antisemitic enough to deny someone legal status in the US.

American Jews have been pivotal in the battle for civil and constitutional rights, which makes it particularly cynical and loathsome that their alleged interests would be used as an excuse to attack civil liberties.

/1

Via "One First," I take a quick look at (some of) the legal questions arising out of the arrest, detention, and potential removal of Mahmoud Kahlil; why the government might have at least a *bit* of a leg to stand on; and why that's deeply troubling unto itself:

www.stevevladeck.com/p/131-five-q...

Immigration lawyers the next 4 years

At first glance I thought this said Sean “Puffy” and I didn’t even question it

If we are being forced to re-live 2016 it better include another Cavs championship

The gasp I gupst

I don’t care for the “.bsky.social”