Talking Points Memo: The ‘Invasion’ Invention: The Far Right’s Long Legal Battle to Make Immigrants the Enemy

The Trump administration is using the claim that immigrants have “invaded” the country to justify possibly suspending habeas corpus, part of the constitutional right to due process. A faction of the far right has been building this case for years.

When top Trump adviser Stephen Miller threatened on May 9 that the administration is “actively looking at” suspending habeas corpus in response to an “invasion” from undocumented immigrants, he was operating on a fringe legal theory that a right-wing faction has been working to legitimize for more than a decade.

Hard-liners have referred to immigrants as “invaders” as long as the U.S. has had immigration. By 2022, invasion rhetoric, which had previously been relegated to white nationalist circles, had become such a staple of Republican campaign ads that most of the public agreed an invasion of the U.S. via the southern border was underway.

Now, however, the claim that the U.S. is under invasion has become the legal linchpin of President Donald Trump’s sweeping anti-immigrant campaign.

The claim is Trump’s central justification for invoking the Alien Enemies Act to deport roughly 140 Venezuelans to CECOT, the Salvadoran megaprison, without due process. (The administration cited different legal authority for the remaining deportees.) The Trump administration contends they are members of a gang, Tren de Aragua, that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro is directing to infiltrate and operate in the United States. Lawyers and families of many of the deportees have presented evidence the prisoners are not even members of Tren de Aragua.

The contention is also the throughline of Trump’s day one executive order “Protecting the American People Against Invasion.” That document calls for the expansion of immigration removal proceedings without court hearings and for legal attacks against sanctuary jurisdictions, places that refuse to commit local resources to immigration enforcement.

So far, no court has bought the idea that the U.S. is truly under invasion….

And therein lies the problem: The Trump regime is off pursuing an unconstitutional tangent to solve a problem that is improperly framed as an “invasion”.

It’s a long well-researched article. Please click on the link below and read the entire article.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/the-invasion-invention-the-far-rights-long-legal-battle-to-make-immigrants-the-enemy

Reuters: FBI announces new probes into Dobbs Supreme Court leak, White House cocaine incident

More revenge meddling from the whacked out right wingers:

The FBI will launch new probes into the 2023 discovery of cocaine at the White House during President Joe Biden’s term and the 2022 leak of the Supreme Court’s draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, a top official announced on Monday.

Dan Bongino, a rightwing podcaster-turned-FBI deputy director [quite a promotion!], made the announcement on X, where he said he had requested weekly briefings on the cases’ progress.

Is Bongino even qualified to clean the toilets?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/fbi-announces-new-probes-into-dobbs-supreme-court-leak-white-house-cocaine-incident/ar-AA1Fvilt


https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-announces-new-probes-into-dobbs-supreme-court-leak-white-house-cocaine-2025-05-26

The Nation: The Supreme Court Gifts Trump Even More Power

The court seems ready to give the president extraordinary power over what had been independent worker- and consumer-protection agencies.

The court seems ready to give the president extraordinary power over what had been independent worker- and consumer-protection agencies.

Here’s a troubling news alert for everyone who cares about workers and consumers being protected from illegal, exploitative, and dangerous business practices: The Supreme Court appears ready to give President Donald Trump extraordinary power over what for nearly a century have been independent expert federal worker and consumer protection agencies insulated from White House interference.

The court showed its hand in Wilcox v. Trump—the case involving Trump’s unprecedented effort to fire Gwynne Wilcox—a Senate-confirmed member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the first Black woman to ever serve as a member of the NLRB.

Members of independent agencies like the NLRB, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), are nominated by the president and confirmed by the US Senate for defined terms. They are protected by law against being removed from office except where there has been wrongdoing and only after notice and a hearing. The Supreme Court has recognized and respected these “for cause” removal protections for 90 years.

That is, until now. Upon taking office for his second term, Trump decided that he has the power to unilaterally remove members of independent boards and commissions whenever and for whatever reason he wants. The list of casualties is long—in addition to Wilcox, he has fired members of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the FTC, the CPSC, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Federal Labor Relations Authority, and more. And by firing these officials, Trump has left these consumer- and worker-protection agencies without a quorum to act and hold corporations accountable.

The court’s order is going to embolden a president who has already shown himself willing to push or violate the boundaries of his power. Now that the Supreme Court has nodded at his power to fire members of independent boards and commissions, he will undoubtably continue to do so, even before the Supreme Court definitively rules on the merits of the question in its next term.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/wilcox-trump-federal-agencies

New York Times: As Trumps Monetize Presidency, Profits Outstrip Protests

The president and his family have monetized the White House more than any other occupant, normalizing activities that once would have provoked heavy blowback and official investigations.

When Hillary Clinton was first lady, a furor erupted over reports that she had once made $100,000 from a $1,000 investment in cattle futures. Even though it had happened a dozen years before her husband became president, it became a scandal that lasted weeks and forced the White House to initiate a review.

Thirty-one years later, after dinner at Mar-a-Lago, Jeff Bezos agreed to finance a promotional film about Melania Trump that will reportedly put $28 million directly in her pocket — 280 times the Clinton lucre and in this case from a person with a vested interest in policies set by her husband’s government. Scandal? Furor? Washington moved on while barely taking notice.

The Trumps are hardly the first presidential family to profit from their time in power, but they have done more to monetize the presidency than anyone who has ever occupied the White House. The scale and the scope of the presidential mercantilism has been breathtaking. The Trump family and its business partners have collected $320 million in fees from a new cryptocurrency, brokered overseas real estate deals worth billions of dollars and are opening an exclusive club in Washington called the Executive Branch charging $500,000 apiece to join, all in the past few months alone.

Just last week, Qatar handed over a luxury jet meant for Mr. Trump’s use not just in his official capacity but also for his presidential library after he leaves office. Experts have valued the plane, formally donated to the Air Force, at $200 million, more than all of the foreign gifts bestowed on all previous American presidents combined.

And Mr. Trump hosted an exclusive dinner at his Virginia club for 220 investors in the $TRUMP cryptocurrency that he started days before taking office in January. Access was openly sold based on how much money they chipped in — not to a campaign account but to a business that benefits Mr. Trump personally.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/25/us/politics/trump-money-plane-crypto.html

MSNBC: Judge warns of Trump’s ‘pernicious’ law firm targeting in ruling against it

It’s the latest ruling striking down one of Trump’s revenge orders against law firms the president doesn’t like.

Fully blocking Trump’s order against the firm Jenner & Block, the George W. Bush appointee noted that the order in this case is one of several targeting firms that “did not bow to the current presidential administration’s political orthodoxy.” The judge said the order went after the firm “because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer Jenner once employed.”

Sitting in Washington, D.C., Bates called the order “doubly violative of the Constitution.”

“Most obviously,” he wrote, quoting a recent Supreme Court precedent, “retaliating against firms for the views embodied in their legal work — and thereby seeking to muzzle them going forward — violates the First Amendment’s central command that government may not ‘use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression.’”

The judge also highlighted the “more subtle but perhaps more pernicious” issue of “the message the order sends to the lawyers whose unalloyed advocacy protects against governmental viewpoint becoming government-imposed orthodoxy.”

He said the order “seeks to chill legal representation the administration doesn’t like, thereby insulating the Executive Branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers. It thus violates the Constitution and the Court will enjoin its operation in full.”

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/judge-jenner-block-trump-law-firms-rcna208847

Daily Beast: John Roberts Personally Delivers DOGE Win for Trump

Chief Justice John Roberts has personally shielded the Department of Government Efficiency from having to hand over reams of internal data.

Acting as an individual, Roberts temporarily blocked two orders from a lower court that instructed DOGE to turn over thousands of pages of documents and have its administrator, Amy Gleason, sit for a deposition.

The emergency stay only required Robert’s approval, not the entire Supreme Court’s, as he is the justice who handles these requests when they arise out of the Washington, D.C., courts.

The stay is temporary, likely only to last a few days. It allows the court time to decide whether it wants to consider the case on its merits and make a ruling.

The question at stake in the case is whether DOGE has to fulfill public information requests under the Freedom of Information Act. The case hinges on whether the group, which has been led by Elon Musk, is a government agency.

The Trump administration has argued that DOGE is merely an advisory group to President Donald Trump and therefore does not have to hand over its data.

So for now, at least, there will be no sunshine.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/chief-justice-roberts-personally-delivers-doge-data-win-for-trump

2paragraphs: Trump’s Spokesperson Karoline [Bimbo #1] Leavitt “Just Took Away His Presidential Immunity Defense” Says Prosecutor

Trump’s Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt “Just Took Away His Presidential Immunity Defense” Says Prosecutor

President Donald Trump hosted a dinner at his golf club in Virginia on Thursday evening for the top 220 holders of his personal $TRUMP meme coin. The top 25 in the group of investors participated in a VIP reception with the president.

When a reporter asked White House spokesperson Karoline [Bimbo #1] Leavitt if the list of attendees was going to be made available to the public, she replied, “The president is attending it in his personal time.”

Republican political pundit and Trump critic Tim Miller responded: “Presidents don’t get ‘personal time.’ There’s not like a magic suit you wear when you are doing official business and one where you are just Donald from Queens.”

Former Republican political pundit and Supreme Court attorney George Conway (ex-husband of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign manager Kellyanne Conway) replied to Miller: “Actually, it’s fine. If Trump is saying he’s doing something on his “personal time,” then obviously that means he’s not acting within what the Supreme Court calls “the outer perimeter of his official responsibility,” which, in turn, means he’s not immune from criminal prosecution.”

https://2paragraphs.com/2025/05/trumps-spokesperson-karoline-leavitt-just-took-away-his-presidential-immunity-defense-says-prosecutor/

Raw Story: ‘Rubber-stamping’ Supreme Court just shot itself in the foot: analyst

Legal experts are claiming that the U.S. Supreme Court may come to regret its emergency “shadow docket” decision allowing President Donald Trump to fire members of two federal boards — a move that was considered illegal.

Without hearing the merits of the case, the court issued its ruling Thursday that permitted Trump to fire a member of the National Labor Relations Board and a member of the Merit Systems Protection Board, an agency that ensures federal employment decisions are not influenced by politics.

In a preview of Slate’s “Amicus” podcast, legal journalist Mark Joseph Stern exclaimed, “He illegally fired people, and the Supreme Court just rubber-stamped it!”

Stern explained that the 6-3 ruling along conservative and liberal lines will empower Trump “to disregard the law in areas where the Supreme Court doesn’t want him to. And eventually, when the Supreme Court tells him he can’t do something, he might just say: You’ve already given me so much power that I’m going to choose not to respect yours any further.”

“So, magically, this decision does not apply to Jerome Powell, who gets to remain chair of the Fed.”

https://www.rawstory.com/scotus-decisions

Raw Story: White House claim puts Trump ‘potentially outside the immunity shield’: attorney

An attempt by White House press secretary Karoline [Bimbo #1] Leavitt to blow off ethical and legal concerns about Donald Trump’s crypto dinner on Thursday night might come back to haunt her boss.

Thursday afternoon [Bimbo #1] Leavitt lectured reporters in the Brady Briefing Room about the dinner which was to include foreign investors at a Donald Trump golf resort in Virginia, telling NBC’s Garrett Haake, “Well, as you know, Garrett, this question has been raised with the president. I have also addressed the dinner tonight. The president is attending it in his personal time. It is not a White House dinner, it’s not taking place here at the White House. But certainly I can raise that question and try to get you an answer for it.”

[Bimbo #1] Leavitt’s claim of “personal time” caught the ear of multiple Trump critics.

On X, The Bulwark’s Tim Miller pointed out, “President’s don’t get ‘personal time.’ There’s not like a magic suit you wear when you are doing official business and one where you are just Donald from Queens.”

Conservative lawyer and ardent Trump opponent George Conway took the next step and suggested, “Actually, it’s fine. If Trump is saying he’s doing something on his ‘personal time,’ then obviously that means he’s not acting within what the Supreme Court calls ‘the outer perimeter of his official responsibility,’ which, in turn, means he’s not immune from criminal prosecution.”

Oops! You probably shouldn’t run your mouth so much, Karoline [Bimbo #1] Leavitt, but I understand that’s all you do, and you do it so exceptionally well. 😀

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-immunity-2672194246

The Hill: Vance: Courts trying to ‘literally overturn the will of the American people’

Vice-President J.D. [“Dunce”] Vance waded into the tug-of-war between the courts and executive branch in an interview published earlier this week, warning that the courts should pull back or risk stepping on the will of the American people.

How simple can I make this, Bubba?

The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the courts exist to protect the rights and due process of our people from mob rule. Our rights are inalienable. The will of the people is irrelevant in this context.

How the hell did you ever pass high school civics, let alone earn a law degree? Your apparent stupidity is mindboggling.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5315703-vance-judiciary-immigration-voters