Immigration enforcement and JW's

[Shawnster]

10 hours ago, Allabord4Jah said:

Could someone ask the F&Discreet about this matter on illegal brothers and sister's? 

 

 

What would you like asked? What questions do you have? 

[Esined]

@Allabord4Jah You might consider doing research on this topic in the Watchtower online library. There have been immigration and refugee crises all over the world for decades or longer, affecting many of the friends and congregations, so the organization must be very aware of many situations involving matters of immigration status. 
 

If you notice that it hasn’t been a  topic addressed frequently or in much detail in publications, talks, etc, what could that mean?

 

 

[Dark King]

The term ICE can quickly become the term RICE or RCE. The R stands for religion.

 

Keep on the watch ⌚ 

[Tortuga]

31 minutes ago, Dark King said:

The term ICE can quickly become the term RICE or RCE. The R stands for religion.

 

Keep on the watch ⌚ 

Religion Immigration Customs Enforcement?

[Dark King]

16 minutes ago, Tortuga said:

48 minutes ago, Dark King said:

The term ICE can quickly become the term RICE or RCE. The R stands for religion.

 

Keep on the watch ⌚ 

Religion Immigration Customs Enforcement?

Yes, working with the UN, to jail and execute and war with against religion on a global scale. Deporting religious members to their birth country to stand on trial.

Edited June 24 by Dark King

[Tortuga]

Just now, Dark King said:

Yes, working with the UN, to jail and execute and war with against religion and a global scale. Deporting religious members to their birth country to stay in trial.

Based on their religion?

 

[Dark King]

1 minute ago, Tortuga said:

2 minutes ago, Dark King said:

Yes, working with the UN, to jail and execute and war with against religion and a global scale. Deporting religious members to their birth country to stay in trial.

Based on their religion?

Yes, based on their religion.

[Dark King]

There is already a Muslim travel ban, and the UN can enforce a Christian travel ban. Insert whatever country or religion that opposes different religions.

 

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/blog/president-trumps-new-travel-ban-what-you-need-to-know/

[Dark King]

They can easy Come back and say we Jehovah Witnesses doesn't swear allegiance to our Nations and then say we're undocumented aliens.

 

 

Supreme Court limits judges’ power to halt Trump’s birthright citizenship order

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/27/supreme-court-trump-birthright-citizenship-case.html

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 27 by Dark King

[trottigy]

23 hours ago, Dark King said:

They can easy Come back and say we Jehovah Witnesses doesn't swear allegiance to our Nations and then say we're undocumented aliens.

 

 

Supreme Court limits judges’ power to halt Trump’s birthright citizenship order

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/27/supreme-court-trump-birthright-citizenship-case.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think that's how that works or is even close to what the supreme court decision was about.

[Dark King]

9 hours ago, trottigy said:

I don't think that's how that works or is even close to what the supreme court decision was about.

 

Yes, it's not what the supreme Court decision was about. But I watched the oral arguments live that they was doing before the Supreme Court little over a month ago. And during the oral arguments One of the Supreme Court justices actually mentioned a case of Jehovah Witnesses how we were allowed to take that case and use it for the entire United States.

 

That same legal precedence was being argued in favor of what just got overturned by the Supreme Court.

Edited Saturday at 11:58 PM by Dark King

[Dark King]

This is what artificial intelligence said about the court case and Jehovah Witnesses.

 

The Supreme Court may mention Jehovah's Witnesses cases in the context of birthright citizenship cases to draw parallels regarding the use of nationwide injunctions. 

Specifically, in the recent case concerning the Trump administration's attempt to restrict birthright citizenship through an executive order, some judges issued nationwide injunctions to block the order's implementation. The Supreme Court, however, limited the power of these lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions, arguing that they likely exceed the authority of district judges. The mention of Jehovah's Witnesses cases, such as the one concerning the flag salute in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), likely serves as an example where universal or nationwide injunctions were used in the past. Justice Sotomayor, for instance, referred to the West Virginia flag-salute case, noting that the injunction in that case was universal. 

Therefore, the reference to Jehovah's Witnesses cases is primarily to illustrate the historical practice of issuing nationwide injunctions to protect civil liberties, even if the Supreme Court's current stance is to limit their use. This is distinct from Jehovah's Witnesses' long history of fighting for religious freedom and other First Amendment rights through various legal challenges. According to the Free Speech Center, the Jehovah's Witnesses have a notable history of defending their religious freedom and related civil liberties in the Supreme Court. 

[Dark King]

This video reminds me of the situation that we're dealing with now look at minute marker 5:50 minutes and I think he's talking about the same subject of what this case got overturned of jurisdiction throughout the entire United States.

 

Watchtower v. Village of Stratton

 

https://www.jw.org/finder?srcid=share&wtlocale=E&lank=pub-jwbrd_201504_2_VIDEO

 

Marker 5:50 minutes

Edited Sunday at 12:52 AM by Dark King

[Doug]

2 hours ago, Dark King said:

 

That same legal precedence was being argued in favor of what just got overturned by the Supreme Court.

 

But it wasn't the same legal precedence.  Stratton was a SCOTUS decision.  It has effect in every jurisdiction.

 

The justices were considering a nationwide injunction handed down by a District Court judge.  Does that judge have such authority?  NO.

[Dark King]

1 hour ago, Doug said:

But it wasn't the same legal precedence.  Stratton was a SCOTUS decision.  It has effect in every jurisdiction.

 

The justices were considering a nationwide injunction handed down by a District Court judge.  Does that judge have such authority?  NO.

Yes, you're right. A federal judge and a Supreme Court is totally different thing. The federal judge doesn't have the authority of a Supreme Court judge. 

 

 

 

But if you notice in the video about Stratton, a federal judge had a Nationwide judgment against in on us. I think this is part of the issue. I think this part of the issue do a federal judge can put an injunction or judgment to affect the whole country?