Well argued, and there’s a case to be made for it. My point is that its application to the predatory incursion aspect of the law is new, and requires us to trust the executive when it takes domestic law enforcement action on a national security issue in a way that is not justiciable (i.e., subject to judicial oversight). Strip away the identity of the president and the alien enemies and present that situation in the abstract, and you see how it poses risks.

And I’m on the record here arguing in defense (at least conditionally) of the Mahmoud Khalil detention, which has precedent and is justiciable. But to my point the left lost their minds over that case and now can’t make a helpful messaging distinction between it and this one which actually could pose some serious constitutional issues.