Texas Representative Nicole Collier filed a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that her confinement in the state Capitol by the Republican majority is unlawful. Collier, along with other Democrats, had previously left the state to block the enactment of new congressional maps. House Speaker Dustin Burrows, a Republican, subsequently required Democratic legislators to sign a form agreeing to 24-hour police surveillance, which Collier refused to do. Collier’s lawsuit contends that the legislature lacks the power to detain a lawmaker based on concerns about future absences, thus making her confinement illegal.
Read More
The Library of Congress’s online copy of the U.S. Constitution was briefly modified to remove the section guaranteeing the right to challenge detention, coinciding with the Trump administration’s consideration of suspending habeas corpus. Government officials attributed the deletion to a technical “glitch,” prompting internal review and correction. The timing of the error raised suspicion, given the administration’s efforts to undermine constitutional rights and Trump’s ongoing attempt to control the Library of Congress. The deleted sections have since been restored, and the Library of Congress has stated it was due to a “coding error”.
Read More
Recently, several sections of Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution were found to be missing from the official U.S. government website, as discovered by internet users and confirmed by TechCrunch. The Wayback Machine indicates these changes occurred within the last month, with Section 8 partially removed and Sections 9 and 10 entirely deleted. These missing sections detail the powers of Congress, limitations on state authority, and protections for citizens, including those related to habeas corpus. According to the Library of Congress, the omissions are due to a “coding error” and will be rectified soon; however, the White House has declined to comment further.
Read More
The official congressional website, congress.gov, has removed Sections 9 and 10 of Article I from its “Constitution Annotated” resource, raising concerns about the integrity of the document. Section 9, which includes the right to habeas corpus, has been deleted, along with other constitutional protections. This act mirrors former President Trump’s past actions, where he edited out parts of the Constitution that didn’t align with his views, showcasing an assault on the rule of law. This act is a bold step, laying the groundwork for misinformation and making it easier to disregard fundamental rights, despite the law itself remaining unchanged.
Read More
The Department of Justice has launched an unusual lawsuit against the entire U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, citing the court’s order to temporarily pause deportations for individual migrant habeas petitions. The DOJ argues this order overreaches judicial authority and undermines the executive branch’s immigration enforcement priorities. This action is a response to a case that began in May and followed the deportation of a Maryland man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, which the DOJ has called an “administrative error.” The case, which is being defended by noted conservative lawyer Paul Clement, has been moved out of Maryland and is likely to be appealed to higher courts.
Read More
A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to return hundreds of Venezuelan nationals deported to El Salvador’s CECOT prison. The judge ruled that the deportations, conducted under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act without individual judicial review, violated due process rights. While the Supreme Court vacated a prior injunction halting the deportations, it affirmed the right to individual habeas corpus petitions. The judge deemed the situation “Kafkaesque,” citing evidence suggesting many detainees lacked gang ties and were imprisoned based on flimsy accusations. The ruling mandates the return of the Venezuelans to the U.S. to challenge their deportations.
Read More
Kristi Noem, during a Senate hearing, incorrectly defined habeas corpus, claiming it allows the president to remove people from the country and suspend their rights. Senator Hassan corrected her, explaining its true meaning as a protection against unlawful detention. Noem’s unfazed response and subsequent insistence on the president’s authority to suspend it suggests a calculated performance rather than genuine ignorance. This aligns with the MAGA archetype of the “bimbo”—a woman who prioritizes loyalty and aggressive defense of the party line over intellect, deflecting criticism with feigned stupidity. This calculated performance effectively shields her from accountability for her actions.
Read More
During a Senate hearing, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem incorrectly defined habeas corpus as the president’s right to deport individuals, rather than the right of detained persons to challenge their detention. This misunderstanding occurred as the Trump administration considers suspending habeas corpus for immigrants facing deportation. Senator Hassan’s question regarding the definition of habeas corpus prompted Noem’s inaccurate response. Noem’s answer highlights a significant gap in understanding of fundamental legal rights amidst discussions of mass deportations.
Read More
Kristi Noem’s recent Senate hearing performance highlights a concerning trend: the appointment of individuals to high-level positions based on loyalty rather than competence. Her demonstrably flawed understanding of habeas corpus, a fundamental legal principle, is not merely a gaffe; it represents a profound lack of knowledge and understanding expected of someone holding her position. Noem’s response, suggesting that habeas corpus is a presidential power to remove people from the country, is not just inaccurate; it’s fundamentally misguided. The sheer misinterpretation of such a basic concept raises serious questions about her suitability for the role.
Her response underscores a larger problem within the current political climate.… Continue reading
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller stated the Trump administration is considering suspending habeas corpus to circumvent judicial blocks on deportations. Miller cited the Constitution’s provision allowing suspension during invasion, arguing that court overreach in cases like the blocking of Venezuelan TPS terminations necessitates this action. He contends that courts are undermining the executive and legislative branches, citing recent Supreme Court rulings on deportation and habeas corpus challenges as evidence. The administration views the suspension of habeas corpus as a potential solution to these perceived judicial obstacles.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood