Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: What the Constitution, Supreme Court say about 'due process' for
 Trump deportees:
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 18:59:16 -0500
Organization: Yellow Jersey, Ltd.
Lines: 220
Message-ID: <102d58j$296pr$1@dont-email.me>
References: <10204bo$2javi$4@dont-email.me> <1020f1h$2pd7f$3@dont-email.me>
 <1022rae$3jak1$2@dont-email.me> <10244ju$3s1io$4@dont-email.me>
 <10247qm$3svis$2@dont-email.me> <1024cm2$3u4uq$1@dont-email.me>
 <10256um$4dts$1@dont-email.me> <1025982$4pr1$3@dont-email.me>
 <1025ns1$bdcs$4@dont-email.me> <1026bcg$330rl$10@dont-email.me>
 <1026upd$jv4p$1@dont-email.me> <4r0e4kla3n7ppmqmklnbav1ng9eql9lc12@4ax.com>
 <1027gin$oc0i$2@dont-email.me> <1028soi$330rl$11@dont-email.me>
 <omvf4kdlt1j2lupt4osuv6i2d6oarp5cgl@4ax.com> <1029mt7$1bc5q$2@dont-email.me>
 <1029o9n$1ckfr$2@dont-email.me> <1029qo6$1d36u$1@dont-email.me>
 <1029rt0$1daeo$1@dont-email.me> <102akat$1j614$3@dont-email.me>
 <102ar56$1o519$2@dont-email.me> <102bi6h$1sgd9$2@dont-email.me>
 <102bvou$1vqar$2@dont-email.me> <102cogs$261n5$1@dont-email.me>
 <102ct8p$27a74$4@dont-email.me> <102d3b2$28nv3$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 01:59:16 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ad713ff80ee67a9e249fcb98d36926da";
	logging-data="2399035"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/SVXM/oF78JIsrtNvzsfCf"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:FFtSYbJJqka2qK2FYaP6GY16Kkg=
In-Reply-To: <102d3b2$28nv3$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US

On 6/11/2025 6:26 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 6/11/2025 5:42 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 6/11/2025 3:21 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 6/11/2025 9:19 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 6/11/2025 4:27 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>> On 6/10/2025 10:54 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/10/2025 7:58 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/10/2025 2:01 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/10/2025 12:41 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/10/2025 12:59 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/10/2025 11:35 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/10/2025 5:59 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Jun 2025 05:09:37 -0400, zen cycle
>>>>>>>>>>>> <funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/9/2025 11:56 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One has to wonder why the Democrats are so 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposed to efforts to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ensure that the only votes cast are from 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people who are qualified to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vote ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> They aren't, dumbass. They're against the false 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trope that there was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> widespread fraud. They're against the the lies 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that large numbers of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> unqualified individuals cast votes. They're 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> against the demonization and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> assaults on the character of people who 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> honestly worked their polling
>>>>>>>>>>>>> places with integrity and certified election 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> results to a result that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the magatards didn't like.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Elections in the the US are free and fair, with 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> minimal cases of fraud.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The vast majority of ineligible votes cast are 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the result of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> administrative errors and mistakes. The 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder are so small as to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> constitute an insignificant blip in the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> statistical noise.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When you want to enact legislation based on 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> lies, you're doing it wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Re elections, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Years ago when I lived in the U.S. I believe 
>>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a limit on
>>>>>>>>>>>> the amount of money that an organization or 
>>>>>>>>>>>> individual could give to
>>>>>>>>>>>> support a political party running in an election
>>>>>>>>>>>> Seemed logical... rich folks couldn't dominate 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the party.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Now I read that the president's ex buddy was the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> largest contributor -
>>>>>>>>>>>> millions of dollars.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> My memory is fealty? Or they changed the rules?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Effectively, they changed the rules. The Supreme 
>>>>>>>>>>> Court decided money is speech. See https:// 
>>>>>>>>>>> publicintegrity.org/ politics/ the- citizens- 
>>>>>>>>>>> united- decision-and-why-it- matters/? 
>>>>>>>>>>> gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=10586056683
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Under which unions and the like are treated 
>>>>>>>>>> exactly the same as other groups of associated 
>>>>>>>>>> individuals.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> um...no.
>>>>>>>>> Citizens united allowed corporations to contribute 
>>>>>>>>> essentially in the same manner that labor unions 
>>>>>>>>> do. CU didn't affect individual contributions 
>>>>>>>>> (afair). REcall the famous Romney line after the 
>>>>>>>>> decision (paraphrased for political expedience) 
>>>>>>>>> 'corporations are people too'. That isn't really 
>>>>>>>>> what he said but it's more accurate than 'I can see 
>>>>>>>>> russia from my house'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In context Mr Romney was correct.  Fictitious 
>>>>>>>> persons share many obligations, rights and 
>>>>>>>> liabilities with humans; They pay taxes, can be sued 
>>>>>>>> civilly and criminally, they can contract, own and 
>>>>>>>> dispose of property, etc. There are differences; 
>>>>>>>> fictitious persons cannot vote.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Fictitious persons" AKA corporations cannot be 
>>>>>>> physically punished nor executed. They cannot be 
>>>>>>> drafted and sent to war. They cannot (practically) be 
>>>>>>> deported, although many "self deport" to operate from 
>>>>>>> locations that will allow them to evade taxes and 
>>>>>>> make even more money. They have no loyalty to the 
>>>>>>> nation they were "born" in, they often have no 
>>>>>>> concern for their community nor for the _real_ 
>>>>>>> persons who live there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They exert excessive influence over American politics 
>>>>>>> and over the world at large, to the detriment of 
>>>>>>> countless _real_ persons. It's ludicrous that they 
>>>>>>> are given the "rights" that they enjoy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But then, they've been able to buy very important 
>>>>>>> judges.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Weirdly, they seem to now enjoy approval even from 
>>>>>>> some "individualistic" MAGA maniacs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have formed, sold, dissolved, bought, reorganized 
>>>>>> several corporations. I suspect that you do not have a 
>>>>>> good grasp of this area; of corporate law or 
>>>>>> regulation or governance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How many of those 'corporations' had to register for 
>>>>> the draft?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes there are differences.
>>>>
>>>> Corporations, are fictitious persons (such as NEA/ACT, 
>>>> SEIU, AMA, the Boy Scouts and Chase Bank, law firms and 
>>>> real estate LLCs, etc) are not citizens and such cannot 
>>>> be executed, cannot vote etc. But the officers and/or 
>>>> directors can be jailed, the entity can be fined (and to 
>>>> some extent the officers as well).
>>>>
>>>> But back to the above, all those entities enjoy freedom 
>>>> of assembly and speech in the collected form of their 
>>>> constituent individuals. Oh, and they are taxed, above 
>>>> and beyond the individual liability of the members, 
>>>> officers and directors.
>>>
>>> Congratulations on having formed corporations. 
>>> Congratulations on those entities having paid taxes.
>>>
>>> But the idea that corporations are practically equivalent 
>>> to humans is more nonsensical than the idea that a 
>>> muscular 230 pound fullback becomes a girl when he puts 
>>> on a dress. Both ideas are ludicrous.
>>>
>>> And the dress makes no real difference to anyone, yet 
>>> generates outrage and hand wringing, especially from the 
>>> right. While the "personal speech" in the form of 
>>> millions of campaign dollars  enables the purchase of 
>>> lawmakers and judges, reduces the power of thoughtful 
>>> individual voters and produces other severe distortions 
>>> in our democracy. Why no outrage from the right?
>>>
>>> Answer: Voters on the right have been suckered into 
>>> thinking this is somehow good for them.
>>>
>>
>> You have an opinion, which is fine.
>>
>> SCOTUS however ruled that associations of individuals can 
>> express opinion under 1st Amendment protected speech and 
>> assembly rights in unison, besides individually. How is 
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========