Democrats and Immigration: A Discussion
There seems to be a lot of noise coming from Democrats about the so-called “legitimate process.” Whenever the Trump administration attempts to deport illegal immigrants—especially those with significant criminal backgrounds—suddenly they care deeply about individual rights and constitutional guarantees.
It’s curious, isn’t it? I mean, we’re talking about some serious criminals here—like members of MS-13 or human traffickers. And yet, there’s this outcry about a “legitimate process.” It’s almost like they forget about it when it comes to certain individuals. Mark Levin highlights this, mentioning Venezuelan gang members sent by the Maduro regime. It’s almost surreal, especially considering the past, when Trump faced a judge in Manhattan.
Back then, no one seemed to mind the so-called legitimate process.
Levin points out that Trump’s due process rights were constantly bypassed, leaving him in the dark about the charges against him.
The reality is pretty straightforward. Democrats support legitimate procedures only when it aligns with their agenda—especially regarding illegal immigrants.
They opened U.S. borders wide and brought in all sorts of individuals—good, bad, and everything in between. What’s the end game? It seems like a push for a single-party rule under the Democrats.
However, with each deportation, their dream of transforming citizens into supporters for their party feels increasingly out of reach.
It’s interesting to see how they utilize constitutional rights related to due process as a tool to resist such changes, often backed by judges appointed by Democrats—many of whom are perceived as “fraudulent.”
Levin stresses that many of these judges have direct ties to Biden and Obama, crafted specifically to impede Trump’s efforts, a scenario he refers to as “judicial tyranny.”
And regarding illegal aliens, Levin argues that there’s nothing in the Constitution mandating various degrees of due process. He references the idea that life, liberty, and property shouldn’t be taken without proper legal procedures, but there’s ambiguity around what that entails.
Sadly, the Supreme Court’s stance on this can be quite unpredictable. Sometimes they align with Trump, but there are instances where they side with left-leaning judges.
“It gets complicated,” Levin remarks, noting that it can hinge on factors like distance from the border, how long an individual has been in the country, and other variables. It seems like rights that should be clear and straightforward are, in reality, very much up for debate.
“The Democrats are trying to convince everyone that due process rights need to be as broad as possible,” he adds.
But, according to Levin, this has more to do with holding power than actual freedom or rights.
It’s a bit concerning, I think, when power seems to take precedence over principles.
For further insights from Levin, check out the video above.
