César Díaz
@cdiaz.bsky.social
240 followers 800 following 74 posts
Dad, partner to @ellunae.bsky.social, son, blue team cloud guy. Ravens fan. Originally from PR 🇵🇷 now in MD
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
cdiaz.bsky.social
@newyorkcomiccon.bsky.social when are badges getting mailed out?
Reposted by César Díaz
willbunch.bsky.social
The Democrat who gets my vote in 2028 will be the one who doesn't condone Charlie Kirk's racism and bigotry by lowering American flags to half-mast
cdiaz.bsky.social
I think the war against logic and intelligence was one of them.
Reposted by César Díaz
davidho.bsky.social
Motherfucking wind farms…
cdiaz.bsky.social
Are you saying the Democrats lost in 2024 because they weren't focused on winning?
Reposted by César Díaz
mskellymhayes.bsky.social
I find it baffling that people I respect still follow the Alt National Park Service account.
cdiaz.bsky.social
I am sure they will write the Nazi's out of the story so they don't offend the current generation of hateful bastards. The bad guys will probably be POC
Reposted by César Díaz
elnorterecuerda.bsky.social
The entire Latino population in the U.S. is 65 million. She means all of us.
Laura Loomer‘s tweet: Alligator lives matter. The good news is, alligators are guaranteed at least 65 million meals if we get started now.
cdiaz.bsky.social
It hurts to say it, but she's right. We can vote her out.
cdiaz.bsky.social
She's also ok with his immoral deportation campaign. She needs to go
Reposted by César Díaz
noahshachtman.bsky.social
If you're a member of the Democratic gerontocracy, the chances of you catching a primary challenger just went up 1000%.
cdiaz.bsky.social
My first car was a 94 Geo Metro
cdiaz.bsky.social
I had the same problem. So weird
Reposted by César Díaz
jazzlikestogame.bsky.social
Retro games are good.
Modern games are good.
Easy mode is good.
Hard mode is good.
Games with DLC are good.
Games without DLC are good.
Games with a different graphic style are good.
Games with a hyper realistic graphic style are good.

Games in general are just so good to me. Enjoy them. ❤️❤️❤️
cdiaz.bsky.social
You do know that's not true, right?
Reposted by César Díaz
cdiaz.bsky.social
Today I earned my Azure Virtual Desktop Specialty certification! Small victory while we try to keep the world from burning down.

#azure #azurecertified
cdiaz.bsky.social
Hey all you "the courts will save us" people, looking at you. Pendejos
chrisgeidner.bsky.social
BREAKING: The Supreme Court, on a 5-4 vote, ends the TROs in the Alien Enemies Act litigation, holding challenges must be brought in habeas and in the jurisdiction in which detainees are held. The court also holds that notice and an actual opportunity to bring a habeas case must be given.
Per Curiam
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 24A931
DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES, ET AL. v. J. G. G., ET AL.
ON APPLICATION TO VACATE THE ORDERS ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
[April 7, 2025]
PER CURIAM.
This matter concerns the detention and removal of Venezuelan nationals believed to be members of Tren de Aragua (TdA), an entity that the State Department has designated as a foreign terrorist organization. See 90 Fed. Reg. 10030
(2025). The President issued Proclamation No. 10903, invoking the Alien Enemies Act (AEA), Rev. Stat. §4067, 50 U.S. C. §21, to detain and remove Venezuelan nationals
"who are members of TdA." We grant the application and vacate the TROs. The detainees seek equitable relief against the implementation of the Proclamation and against their removal under the AEA.
They challenge the Government's interpretation of the Act and assert that they do not fall within the category of removable alien enemies. But we do not reach those argu-ments. Challenges to removal under the AEA, a statute which largely "preclude[s] judicial review," Ludecke v.
Watkins, 335 U.S. 160, 163-164, (1948), must be brought in habeas. Cf. Heikkila v. Barber, 345 U. S. 229, 234-235
(1953) (holding that habeas was the only cause of action available to challenge deportation under immigration statutes that "preclud[ed] judicial intervention" beyond what was necessary to vindicate due process rights). Regardless of whether the detainees formally request release from con-finement, because their claims for relief "necessarily imply the invalidity'" of their confinement and removal under the AEA, their claims fall within the "core" of the writ of habeas corpus and thus must be brought in habeas. Cf. Nance v.
Ward, 597 U. S. 159, 167 (2022) (quoting Heck v. Humph-rey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994)). And "immediate physical release [is not] the only remedy under the federal writ of habeas corpus." Peyton v. Rowe, 391 U. S. 54, 67 (1968); see, e.g., Nance, 597 U. S., at 167 (explaining that a capital prisoner may seek "to overturn his death sentence" in habeas by "analogly]" to seeking release); In re Bonner, 151 U.S. 242, 254, 259 (1894). For "core habeas petitions," "jurisdic-tion lies in only one district: the district of confinement." The detainees also sought equitable relief against summary removal. Although judicial review under the AEA is limited, we have held that an individual subject to detention and removal under that statute is entitled to "judicial review'" as to "questions of interpretation and constitution-ality" of the Act as well as whether he or she "is in fact an alien enemy fourteen years of age or older." Ludecke, 335 U.S., at 163-164, 172, n. 17. (Under the Proclamation, the term "alien enemy" is defined to include "all Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older who are members of TdA, are within the United States, and are not actually naturalized or lawful permanent residents of the United States." 90 Fed. Reg. 13034.) The detainees' rights against summary removal, however, are not currently in dispute. The Government expressly agrees that "TA members subject to removal under the Alien Enemies Act get judicial review." Reply in Support of Application To Vacate 1. "It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law" in the context of removal proceedings. Reno
v. Flores, 507 U. S. 292, 306 (1993). So, the detainees are entitled to notice and opportunity to be heard "appropriate to the nature of the case." Mullane v. Central Hanover
Bank & Trust Co., 339 U. S. 306, 313 (1950). More specifi-cally, in this context, AEA detainees must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.
cdiaz.bsky.social
I'm glad to see him point out that they should continue to follow the same standards as before. I also agree that EOs are not laws. My concern is that Trump cuts off their funding. He technically can't abolish USAID, but they basically have shut it down. Nobody seems to have been able to stop him
Reposted by César Díaz
cdiaz.bsky.social
How many of the people on that chat did you vote to confirm?
Reposted by César Díaz
kerabolonik.bsky.social
@schumer.senate.gov is a coward and a traitor to his constituents and I will scream this from the rafters every damn day until he resigns as Senate minority leader. You sold us out and we will never forgive you.