6 responses to “Better Communications, Public Grievances, and, Of Course, More Pickleball- A Recap of Thursday’s City Council Meeting”

1. 

   JDPower

   April 23, 2025

   Hearing Steve Brown complain about a local newspaper attack a political candidate is rich. That gave me quite the chuckle.

   Log in to Reply
2. 

   Hometown600

   April 22, 2025

   I know that a lot of people in Peachtree City have been clamoring for a new stage in our park, but before we go that route, how about the following: let’s talk to the vendor that constructed the pavilion and see what reparation suggestions they might have. Perhaps they don’t want the name of their business to be synonymous with a city debacle.

   Log in to Reply
3. 

   Stranger Than Fiction

   April 22, 2025

   An update for all who slept through History of Western Civ. class. In 1930s Germany and Italy, colleges and universities were bullied into changing their curricula so courses conformed to the political teachings and goals of their authoritarian leaders. Anyone who disagreed was dismissed from their professorships. At the same time all over these countries, “undesirables” were arrested and removed from society without due process, and the proponents of the authoritarian regime defended this by focusing upon negative aspects of the people removed rather than the unlawful manner in which they were removed. The representative bodies of these countries ceased to exercise their constitutional control over their authoritarian leaders, so more and more power was taken and the judiciary was ignored.

   “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana

   Log in to Reply
   1. 

      the_wing_t

      April 23, 2025

      STF – when illegal aliens enter our country illegally – they give up the right for due process in deciding whether or not to stay here. You want due process? Follow the process to start with.

      I

      Log in to Reply
      1. 

         Stranger Than Fiction

         April 23, 2025

         Mr. Garcia’s protected legal status meant nothing when rounding up the undesirables. I suppose that all Latinos look the same to 47.

         When you bow to even minor demands of an authoritarian, you feed his lust for more power. I hope more colleges will take note of the shameful behavior of Columbia and remain firm in their independence. And Congress should find the fortitude to take back its Constitutional power instead of being toadies.

         We are in very dark times, and nothing looks bright at this point. Maybe true patriots will awaken at some point before we lose our democracy.

         Log in to Reply
      2. 

         Doug Tucker

         April 24, 2025

         Wing. That is not true. It makes economic sense to limit due process to those who have illegally entered our country, but it’s not the American way. There seem to be as many legal arguments about withholding “due process” as there are individuals. Here is another one.

         By Hurst, Emma. “Illegal Immigration and the Right to Due Process.” Juris Magazine, 16 Oct. 2018. “There are 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Eleven million undocumented immigrants make up only 3% of the nation’s population, yet they are often the focal point of politics and legal debate. President Trump’s administration has made it a priority to enforce a “zero tolerance” immigration policy. Although family separations at the border occurred under both the Obama and Bush presidencies, 2018 presented increased outrage at the Trump Administration regarding these separations. The political climate today is harsh in all aspects, and the treatment of illegal immigrants remains a highly debated topic. President Trump tweeted that illegal immigrants in America needed to be sent back “from where they came” with “no Judges or Court Cases.” President Trump’s tweet exposes a bigger issue. What legal rights do illegal immigrants have? Do they deserve more or fewer legal rights?

         The fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution states, “No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ….” The Constitution utilizes the term person, not citizen. This raises the question, does the fourteenth amendment apply to non-citizens?

         The Supreme Court confirms that the fourteenth amendment does apply to non-citizens. The majority opinion in the Supreme Court case, Zadvydas v. Davisholds that aliens, although not citizens are entitled to Due Process of law. In Zadvydas, the Court held potentially permanent detention of an illegal immigrant awaiting deportation unconstitutional, as the illegal immigrant still had liberty rights. The Court held that an immigrant awaiting deportation could not be held for more than ninety days without a hearing providing, “freedom from imprisonment lies at the heart of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.” However, more importantly, the Supreme Court confirmed that all persons are protected and entitled to due process under the United States Constitution. The Court confirmed, “[b]ut once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.”

         But is this right? Does the situation matter? President Trump and his administration argue that those in the country illegally should not be entitled to the same rights as natural born and naturalized citizens[3]. This argument is often enforced by crimes committed by illegal immigrants. This viewpoint is not without some judicial merit as seen in the Zadvydas dissent.[4]In the Zadvydas dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia argues that the Due Process Clause should not protect illegal aliens against the deprivation of liberty. Scalia argued that those who have no constitutional right to remain in the United States, should have no right to be released back into the country. Thus, illegal immigrants have no liberty right protecting them from indefinite detention. Scalia quotes Justice Robert H. Jackson in his dissent stating, “Due process does not invest any alien with a right to enter the United States, nor confer on those admitted the right to remain against the national will.”

         President Trump’s ideology on the treatment of illegal aliens presents a potential judicial shift in the legal rights granted to illegal immigrants. President Trump’s negative viewpoint on the current immigration process could result in action that would change the rights illegal immigrants receive. However, unless action is taken by the President, precedent demands that, unless changed by law, any and all persons be recognized and protected under due process.

         Nevertheless, President Trump’s Twitter declaration and thought process set the stage for a larger debate on the topic. Should illegal immigrant be afforded Due Process when they commit crimes or are detained, despite not having any legal right to be in the United States in the first place? President Trump says no, and so does an increasing number of angry American citizens. Yet, the law stays intact to enforce the opposite. With hostility towards illegal immigrants only gaining momentum, the legal rights of illegal immigrants certainly has potential to face drastic change.”

         Log in to Reply