47 Comments
User's avatar
Inverted Pyramid's avatar

Julie: if an army crossed our borders illegally, does that army get to receive “due process”?

Expand full comment
Julie Kelly's avatar

I have no doubt SCOTUS, Democrats, Ed Whelan, and the national news media would insist they do.

Expand full comment
Robert Yates's avatar

If they can get before the Roberts Court -- Probably.

Expand full comment
Cara Wakefield's avatar

Interesting question!

Expand full comment
Anthony Latimore Jr's avatar

They do not.

Expand full comment
Cara Wakefield's avatar

I know that. It's interesting because no one has posed that question before, and interesting because some brain dead judge would rule they are.

Expand full comment
Robert Yates's avatar

Kind of like John Roberts?

Expand full comment
Cara Wakefield's avatar

Unless another brain dead judge beats him to it.

Expand full comment
Anthony Latimore Jr's avatar

Dont be foolish. They do not

Expand full comment
Inverted Pyramid's avatar

… then what is the difference?

Expand full comment
Anthony Latimore Jr's avatar

Between an invading army vs illegal immigration?

Expand full comment
Inverted Pyramid's avatar

Excellent attempt at reframing!

What is the difference between an illegal army invading the country and an illegal person/people invading the country?

Expand full comment
Anthony Latimore Jr's avatar

One is quickly dealt with. Had we experienced that massive invasion with trump in office, best believe cbp and ice would likely have been given the green light to shoot on sight anyone crossing illegally! It would be nasty but it would solve the issue. An army invading would not have made it to the border to start with, if they did, carpet bomb the border.

Expand full comment
P Mac's avatar

Looks like SCOTUS is engaged in the exercise of slow walking. I do NOT trust the motives of The Court

Expand full comment
Julie Kelly's avatar

So if the court waits until next year to decide on the president's right to invoke AEA without judicial interference--can Trump get that year back?

Expand full comment
HR's avatar

The Supreme Court majority is complicit in the use of the courts to slow down, halt, or outright stop President Trump's agenda. He was very clear in his campaign as to what he would do as President and he was elected. For judges, led by Chief Justice Roberts, to overstep their Article III Powers is leading us to a Constitutional crisis.

Expand full comment
Julie Kelly's avatar

I think we are there.

Expand full comment
HR's avatar

Agreed - Also, no matter how many times I move your message alerts back to my inbox, Apple routes new ones into my junk folder. Keep up the good work!

Expand full comment
Rev. Karlan Fairchild, MDiv's avatar

A good synopsis of the confusion and the ridiculous opinion of the squishy Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Julie. I'm pretty certain that you have read my comments pertaining to that human road block to President Trump's agenda. Also, I have written extensively (at least it seems like) that the true "Constitutional Crisis" in which we are living has nothing to do with any actions taken by President Trump as he attempts to navigate these preposterous decisions rendered by Marxists-Wearing-Black-Robes in the lower tier of the federal judiciary. To the contrary, this "Constitutional Crisis" rests solely on these Marxists-Wearing-Black-Robes in the lower tier of the federal judiciary who appear to believe that they have total control over the President's Article II authority pertaining to executing foreign policy. At the risk of being redundant, the only way this problem will be solved will require President Trump to openly and dramatically defy these execrable decisions. One can only be hopeful and prayerful that it will come to pass...

Expand full comment
Julie Kelly's avatar

I have read all your posts, Karlan, and they are much appreciated!

It is a mutli-pronged judicial coup and the only upside is the American people see how reckless and political these judges are. The solution? I don't know.

Expand full comment
Rev. Karlan Fairchild, MDiv's avatar

Agreed, Julie, but I fear that only a certain percentage of our fellow citizens are fully aware of the dangers posed by this judicial coup. Regrettably, the other percentage who get all of their news from the Marxist-Activist-Journalist-Propagandists probably believe that it's President Trump and not these Marxists-Wearing-Black-Robes in the lower tier of the federal judiciary who pose the "existential" threat.

Expand full comment
Randy Hill's avatar

The dinosaur media is breaking up before our eyes. CNN is down to 475,000 viewers. WaPost subscribers are shrinking. Highly paid anchors are being sacked.

The age of the citizen, independent journalist is here all with a place to publish. And, best of all, we have true investigative journalists like Julie, Molly Hemingway, John Solomon, etc.

Expand full comment
Rev. Karlan Fairchild, MDiv's avatar

Agreed, Randy. Still, I won't count my chickens before they're hatched because there remains a good portion of the citizenry who are wedded to those Marxist-Activist-Journalist-Propagandists. They, like Dracula, will be influential until or unless a stake is driven through their chest, so to speak. We are blessed with Julie and the others but don't forget to include Margot Cleveland.

Expand full comment
Robert Yates's avatar

This isn't a "Constitutional Crisis". It's a judicial coup.

Expand full comment
Carolyn's avatar

Start arresting these judges for insurrection and treason. That is what they are doing. An ordinary citizen would have already been behind bars. Judges are not above the laws.

Expand full comment
Julie Kelly's avatar

It is truly unfortunate and borders on malfeasance that Congress refuses to exercise their constitutional obligation to oversee the judiciary. A few impeachment inquiries might help

Expand full comment
Tom S.'s avatar

Or just ignore them

Expand full comment
K3's avatar

Promote that guy!

This should be the first response to any deportation suit: “… the Court may not entertain [ ] various challenges to the findings contained in the Proclamation or to the President’s exercise of his AEA authority.”

Expand full comment
WvVet's avatar

My question is...is President just going to let these judges destroy his presidency? He seems to still have faith in the SC. I don't know many people who do.

Expand full comment
Julie Kelly's avatar

I think the president should continue to follow his own AEA proclamation, defying the courts. If judges admit the role of the courts is "limited" or even nonexistent, Trump is correct in ignoring them.

Expand full comment
Cara Wakefield's avatar

The power of TDS still astonishes me. It can make even an SC judge look a complete fool. Way to destroy your legacy, Roberts.

Expand full comment
alan carpenter's avatar

OK!!!!!! WHAT the HECK DO WE NEED LAWS FOR TO PROTECT US IN OUR COUNTRY????? WHY DO WE NEED A Show DOG...supreme COURT JUSTICE SYSTEM ⚖️ THAT CANT ADJUST Common sense OUT OF OUR CONSTITUTION OR AMENDMENTS FOR US CITIZENS OF AMERICA TO BE SAFE AND PROTECT THIS GREAT NATION....THEY NEED TO PRAYTO GOD..ALMIGHTY !!!!!!THE TRUE LAW GIVER ✝️ AND GET THEIR HEADS OUT OF THE MUD!

THANK YOU MISS JULIE KELLY 🇺🇲 ⚖️⚖️⚖️⚖️🔥🗽✝️🦅❤️🤍💙🇺🇲🌹

IM SO TICKED 🤬

Expand full comment
KimboThisIsMyCountry2's avatar

Thank you Julie! Your explanations are invaluable!

Expand full comment
Charles Wemyss, Jr.'s avatar

Hard to imagine supposedly legal scholars that achieve the vaunted level of a Supreme Court judge didn’t know that they were sowing the seeds of discontent and confusion. It is okay for a senior senator from NY to threaten SCOTUS judges, it is okay to have a university like Harvard practice discrimination in its admissions process, but Lord help the President of the United States when he or she attempts to exercise their prerogatives in the Executive Branch of Government. Those judges all knew exactly what mayhem they were creating, they just wanted to punt the issues back to lower courts to keep the clock moving, every hour of delay is an hour less of Orangeman Bad in the Oval Office. Like those who wish to depose Vladimir Putin from his role as head of the Russian Federation, careful SCOTUS what you wish for, the next president may be a lot more draconian than the one you’re trying to stop. Or the people will determine the game is rigged. Then all bets are off. Once a revolution starts it doesn’t stop until it runs out of steam or human capital to keep it going.

Expand full comment
Julie Kelly's avatar

The same Democrats insisting Trump must follow the law or argue he is defying the law (courts) are now attempting to halt federal authorities from enforcing federal immigration law. The double standards of the Democratic Party has no bounds.

Expand full comment
Charles Wemyss, Jr.'s avatar

Yep…and it won’t end well. Willing to give Patel and Bongino some time to clear out the mutineers (98% of the work force at the FBI) and AG Bondi time to get the right AAG’s on the right cases. Really looking forward to Harmeet Dhilon and a phalanx of the DOJ’s most rabid young lawyers looking for scalps at Harvard. “Hello Dean XYZ of Admissions show me your books, ya know the ones that show us how much you have been taking on the side to be sure Binky Hoverton the XIIth gets in and the other set that show just how awful your process for admissions here at Harvard really are…” When you see them being led out the front door of the admissions office crying like Bud Fox as he is leaving the trading floor in Wall Street you know we will have gotten somewhere!

Expand full comment
Robert Yates's avatar

"vaunted level of a Supreme Court judge didn’t know that they were sowing the seeds of discontent and confusion"

They know it but they hate Trump so bad that they don't care if they hurt the country as long as it hurts Trump.

Expand full comment
Randy Hill's avatar

Everyone should use Duck Duck Go’s bowser and encrypted email because of their security.

Expand full comment
Jeanne Dukes's avatar

Julie, Suddenly Safari will not open your articles. I have no trouble with any other substacks opening so it tells me you are being censored. As I am a paying customer I sure would love to continue reading your articles. Can you check on your end and see if they are censoring you? Thanks. JD Dukes

Expand full comment
John Stalmach's avatar

No problems with Safari here. Comments opened right away, and the link to "Read" also works.

Expand full comment
Julie Kelly's avatar

Thanks for alerting me. I can open on Safari--I wonder it it's a security feature on your device? Not sure, I am sorry!

Expand full comment
Dissident Majority's avatar

I like Inverted Pyramid's rhetorical question. The answer is YES according to the lunacy laid out by the leader of the BlackRobed Tyrants, Chief Justice John Roberts. This process that Johnny Bob has led, will result in SCOTUS creating legal rights under the constitution for non-citizen criminals. Bank it!!

Here is another rhetorical/thought question: If the states of Texas and Louisiana (and there may have been more states, I don't recall) did not have "standing" to bring lawsuits to prevent the counting of electoral votes by states who did not follow the constitution in the 2020 election, when going directly to the Supreme Court is the ONLY venue for disputes between states; how then does a non-citizen criminal have ANY standing and thus due process?

Expand full comment
Rumaggiu's avatar

Just a passing note that the United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304 (1936), held that the the President's power in foreign affairs is "plenary and exclusive."

Expand full comment
Pat Smith's avatar

Why should Judge Gordon Gallagher care if a Jew hating Egyptian family gets to stay in the US? He isn't Jewish and of Biden appointed him he is most likely a river to the sea fellow traveller. The only solution is to drop the family off on his front porch and let him take care of them.

Expand full comment
Diana Woodward's avatar

But their daughter wants to be a doctor, go to school in America! One journo thought that was the most important item of the illegal Egyptian burning Jews and only talked about the poor daughter, the cruelty of deporting her and her family.

Expand full comment
Pat Smith's avatar

Perhaps she will get a job in the burn unit. Her father can supply the patients. I am so tired of these sob stories.

Expand full comment
James Thomas's avatar

Thank you, George W. Bush.

Expand full comment