In this context of the law, yes, it is a right.
Who's gaslighting?
Being "generally subject to" something does not imply that there is a "right" to that thing.
Being "generally subject to" means that one is exposed or liable to a certain rule, condition, or authority often with exceptions or qualifications.
Having a "right" means possessing a legally enforceable entitlement.
Gaslighting indeed.
I just realized that you were here in 2009. SMH
Who's gaslighting?
Being "generally subject to" something does not imply that there is a "right" to that thing.
Being "generally subject to" means that one is exposed or liable to a certain rule, condition, or authority often with exceptions or qualifications.
Having a "right" means possessing a legally enforceable entitlement.
Gaslighting indeed.
(05-11-2025, 06:15 PM)ironyak Wrote: Durian Fiend - Isn't this what we call "what aboutism"?
Yeah, Tang loves to employ logical fallacies - black and white thinking, strawmanning, false equivalencies, etc. Now we're onto The Appeal to Hypocrisy Fallacy - you know what else I've never seen PrimalEdge, or anyone, discuss here on Punaweb, constitutional habeus rights. Makes them all a bunch of hypocritical bastards to try and bring it up now, for some reason, right?
There is a large backlog of deportation cases in Hawaii currently, according to this article. https://www.civilbeat.org/2024/12/data-d...tury-high/
The chart in the article provides some numbers on yearly Deportation Cases in Hawaii resulting in Removal - ranges from under to 50 to around 450. While there has been some criticism from the ACLU about the process involved with deportation over the years, only recently has the fundamentals of constitutional due process HJ highlighted been completely ignored.
Do people have rights, even when they're not being recognized by the powers that be? Maybe that question was answered 250 years ago? Things could get wild when people start exercising their full complement of constitutional or natural rights - probably best for everyone to side with upholding requirements to follow the legal processes before the alternatives become required.
I just realized that you were here in 2009. SMH