The media lit up yesterday with the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, an accused MS-13 member mistakingly sent to El Salvador. I have previously said that the Administration should have brought back Garcia immediately and pushed for deportation under existing laws. Yet, in the order, the Court ordered the government to “facilitate” the return without stating what that means.
Last evening, the Court issued the short three-paragraph per curiam opinion in Noem v. Garcia.
After the ruling, many on the left claimed “Supreme Court in a unanimous decision: He has a legal right to be here, and you have to bring him back.”
It is a bit more ambiguous than that. The Court actually warned that the district court could order the government to facilitate but not necessarily “to effectuate” the return.
The application is granted in part and denied in part, subject to the direction of this order. Due to the administrative stay issued by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, the deadline imposed by the District Court has now passed. To that extent, the Government’s emergency application is effectively granted in part and the deadline in the challenged order is no longer effective. The rest of the District Court’s order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand. The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term “effectuate” in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs. For its part, the Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated.
So what does that mean? The Court disagrees with many, including the Fourth Circuit, that President Trump had no inherent executive powers to countermand the district court’s order. He clearly does have countervailing powers that have to be weighed more heavily in the matter. The district court is expressly ordered to show “due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.”
What is left is a legal pushmi-pullyu that seems to be going in both directions at once. What if the Trump Administration says that inquiries were made, but the matter has proven intractable or unresolvable? Crickets.
No one would seriously believe that, but what right does the district court have to manage the relations or communications with a foreign country?
The problem with this shadow docket decision is that there is more shadow than sunlight in its meaning.
Jonathan: There is an update to the Armundo Abrego Garcia case. DJT’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, announced today at a presser that Ksenia Karelina, a US citizen, was safely returned after having been detained in Russia for a year. Leavitt proudly announced that since Inauguration Day DJT and his team have “secured the release of more than 40 detained Americans abroad”.
Fine. So what about Abrego Garcia? Although he is not a US citizen he was here legally under a court order and should not have been put on that plane to El Salvador. Even the DJT regime admits this. And so found the Supreme Court. If the DJT regime can brag about bringing home US citizens from imprisonment abroad why can’t it do the same for for someone who was illegally snatched by ICE agents? Talk about double standards!
No dennis – AGAIN Garcia was NEVER Here legally, He never had a visa, he never received a green card, he was not a citizen,
he was not granted asylum. He has had a deportation order for the past 5 years.
The order you cite was an article II court – i.e. EXECUTIVE branch order that he not be deported to El Salvador.
It did NOT bar his deportation.
Further as an Executive branch decision – not based on US immigration law and not issued by Article III courts,
It can be rescinded unilaterally by the executive branch.
That is precisely why DOJ is calling it an administrative error – because they have subsequently rectified it by rescinding the order.
This is much like Obama granting the Dreamers protection. It was not a change in US law, it was not done following the law or constitution. It was an act of executive discretion that can be rescinded at any time by any president
Getting US citizens home is also a discretionary act of the US government – no court could have ordered the return of Karelina and any court doing so would have made doing so impossible or incredibly expensive.
If you want another country to do something they need not do you must threaten them or bribe them.
If you are forced to get another country to do something – the threat or bribe will have to be increeased dramatically.
Outside the left – no one want Garcia back. Few care.
Frankly the order to return him was stupid. It was outside Xinis’s jurisdiction – as was the IJ order baring Garcia from being deported to El Salvador.
Oddly while Sotomayors opinion is a mess, she is the closest to dealing witht the only actual issue.
Garcia can not be imprisoned by or within the control of the US without criminal due process in the US.
The CORRECT order from Xinis – which only should have occured after a fully hearing on the facts and briefing on the law,
would have been to order the STate department to cancel any contract with El Salvador regarding Garcia’s incarceration.
The US can not have Garcia incarcerated anywhere without criminal due process. Garcia is not being detained by the US pending deportation, He can not get out of CECOT by allowing himself to be deported. He is not an enemy combatant subject to AEA detention.
He is PROBABLY an MS13 Gang leader – but while a basis to deport, that is NOT a basis to incarcerate in the US.
El Salvador can deal with Garcia as it wishes. But the US can not require that a person who has not been convicted of a crime or being held as an Enemy Alien, be imprisoned without due process.
The Issue is not why is he in El Salvador – he has properly been deported there.
The issue is why is he in prison ? While se have no control over El Salvador, we can not pay to imprison someone who has not been convicted of a crime.
#. It was a clerical error? Has that person been identified? Isn’t garcia a gang member of Barrio 18 deadly enemies of Ms 13? The reason he can’t be sent to El Salvador? Southern California has approx 30 to 50 thousand gangsters? Garc8a may be dead by now?
I have no idea whether it was a clerical error . It does not matter. It was not a significant error.
Allegedly Garcia is a member of MS13.
The fact that a rival gang might wish to kill him is not a basis for asylum in the US.
To get asylum your country must wish to kill you.
That is a significant part of why asylum is nearly impossible to get.
If you do not like that – change the law.
No, John but it meant that he couldn’t be deported to El Salvador… just El Salvador.
So here’s the issue.
If no other country wants him, he could be stuck in prison. For life. Here in the US.. until the court revisits the issue of the other gang that supposedly wants him dead.
Or he relents and agrees to go to El Salvador where he’d be picked up and face a life in prison or something like that.
How is it possible for a person to be here legally if that person has not adhered to the due process of legal immigration?
Poor Denise.
You should pay attention to the facts.
Garcia could be deported, to anywhere except El Salvador.
The US could ask for his release, but then have him sent elsewhere.
Or they could get him released, held in jail pending another immigration trial. Where the judge considers if the threat from the other gang still holds.
If it does… he could be remanded in jail until either one of the following:
1) He rescinds his right to not be deported to El Salvador
2) He is accepted by another country.
3) At a future time the courts revisit the gang issue and then ships him off to El Salvador where they pick him up and put him in prison.
He has no rights other than to have the Trump administration make a request to El Salvador which could refuse the request and that would be the end of it.
They then can decide not to explain why he wasn’t returned other than the fact they asked El Salvador to return him and they refused.
Jonathan: Finally, you have decided to discuss the illegal deportation of Armando Abrego Garcia (AG)–a case I have been talking about for over a week. I guess it’s better late than never.
The SC, per curiam (9-0), this week upheld both the district court in Maryland and the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals rulings that AG was illegally deported to a concentration camp in El Salvador. But you seem to think the SC’s order doesn’t mean AG will be coming back anytime soon. You quote the Court saying “the intended scope of the term ‘effectuate’ in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear” and the district court may be infringing on the “Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs”.
Chief Justice Roberts and his male brethren on the Court, as well as you, seem to have a problem with plain English because they think the meaning of “effectuate” is ambiguous. It’s not. In legal terms “effectuate” means to bring about, cause or put into force”. In laymen’s terms it means to make something happen. There was no ambiguity in the rulings of the Judge Xinis’ order or that of the 4th Circuit!
Today Judge Xinis held another hearing to carry out the ruling of the SC. She asked the government attorney to give her an update on the current physical location and the custodial status of AG. This was the bizarre reply from the AG Pam Bondi lawyer: “We are still internally reviewing the Supreme Court’s decision and vetting what we can say to the Court”. Judge Xinis wasn’t having any of those excuses. She demanded to details on what the DJT administration had done to “facilitate” AG’s release and return to the US. Again, the DJT attorney tried to deflect: “the defendants are not yet prepared to share that information”. Xinis’ reply: “That means they’ve done nothing”. There will be another hearing and Judge Xinis expects to get some straight answers from the government.
It’s pretty clear what is happening. The DJT regime does not want to return AG to his family. They want to keep him in the notorious prison in El Salvador despite their admission they picked up the wrong guy. So, it appears they are willing to defy three court orders to accomplish their goal of rounding up hundreds of immigrants–most of whom are legally in the US and shipping them off to a concentration camp in El Salvador.
Coincidentally, DJT is going to host Najib Bukele the President of El Salvador , at the WH on Monday. If DJT wanted to right a grievous error of his own making he could say to Bukele: “Listen, Najib, my people screwed up. They pickup the wrong guy. His name is Armando Abrego Garcia. He is a native of your country and is now in your prison. We would like to send a plane down to pick him up and return him here. Any problem with my personal request?” Any doubt Bukele would not comply? But does anyone think DJT wants to comply with court orders? No. Because DJT is a lawless president thinks he can get away with anything!
TURLEY HAS TO WRITE ABOUT WHAT DENNIS wants? HA HA HA
Dennis
once again you can not read.
Turley is responding to the SCOTUS’s order.
SCOTUS said Xinis has the authority to order DHS/State to Fascilitate Garcias return.
They asked Xinis to reconsider the meaning of effectuate – not because they are actually unclear about its meaning.
But because they are somewhat politely saying that Xinis does NOT have the power to order State to Effectuat Garcia’s release.
This order is a mess and full of error, but that is because Xinis’s order is a mess and full of error.
Xinis botched he order and SCOTUS dealt with the order – not the real underlying issues.
Trump is not going to ask Buekela to return Garcia, Trump is going to do everything in his power to keep Garcia out.
You do not seem to grasp that nothing in any of this – not even your alleged illegal Actions by DHS change the fact that Garcia is NOT legally in the US and has no right to be here.
I do not expect he will ever return. What he can hope for is that Xinis orders the US Government to withdraw from any contract to imprison him and MAYBE Bukele releases him to El Salvador.
That is all that Garcia has a right to – if even that.
Outside of left wing nuts such as yourself – no one wants Garcia back.
As ot your alleged lawlessness – in this case like so many others,
you elide inconvenient facts.
Garcia was in the US illegally
he was found by two Article II courts to be here illegally to be an MS13 gang leader and to be deportable.
One Aricle II court – that means EXECUTIVE BRANCH, found that it was not safe in 2019 to deport Garcia to El Salvador.
Since 2019 ICE could have picked him up at anytime and deported him to any country that would take him EXCEPT El Salvador.
Since 2019 El Salvador has effectively destroyed the Rosario Gang that was a threat to Garcia. The Article II court order is effectively moot.
There is no reason Garcia can not be deported to El Salvador.
Furher because that court order was from an Article II court, and because it was not a statutory order, but an order reflecting executive branch policy. It was an excercise of Executive authority, it can be rescinded by any president at any time.
State department has rescinded Protective status for hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants including Garcia.
The Trump administration did not commit a crime.
It did not violate election law.
It violated a discretionary act of the executive. The authority that DHS is answerable to is not congress, not the courts,
But the president. They violated a presidential policy that has since been rescinded.
If you can not get you facts correct, no one should trust anything else you say
#. Thanks, John Say, and call that a wrap.
Dennis,
I must appologize – my early post needs a correction – I misread the SCOTUS order.
But that is better than you lying about it.
SCOTUS said that Judge Xinis can order the Trump administration to fascilitate Garcia’s RELEASE, not his return.
They also directed Xinis to reconsider her order to EFFCTUATE anything – as it is not likely she has jurisdiction.
Regardless Please READ the order by SCOTUS rather than ranting stupidly that it says things it does not say.
Bingo…
Trump to El Salvador… hey look, we don’t want him and our courts ordered me to ask you to release him in to your country.
What? You said thanks but its not going to happen?
OK,thank you.
Hey Judge, we tried. But they said he was a dangerous criminal and they didn’t want to release him at this time.
Sorry.
Oh and yes, we asked real nicely.
LOL
Shabbat Shalom everyone! 🙂
Shalom
There are still a few more minutes. Shabbat Shalom.
No longer an unusual thing, a district court judge building on stupidity.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/04/showdown-judge-xinis-sets-new-hearing-alleged-ms
Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador who is in El Salvador. On any demand for his return to the US [where he was illegally] all El Salvador has to do is say NO. Will this stupid judge invade El Salvador?
What would we do if we had an American in jail for criminal activity and Canada demanded his release or a Canadian court ordered his release? Same situation.
This judge’s writ doesn’t extend to purely Article II powers and certainly doesn’t extend to El Salvador. Where do Democrats find these loons?
The judge has now asked DoJ for daily status updates. This is headed back up the appellate chain and may end up before SCOTUS again. The Justices will have to stop the softly softly approach and dictate terms to these rogue district judges. This one didn’t get the message.
#. The case was sent back for the judge to clarify with deference to the the executive in matters of foreign affairs not within the district courts powers.
Scotus asked the executive to facilitate or help-out the judge in getting the prisoner back now in El Salvador custody.
The judge can attempt to retrieve him without utilizing foreign powers of the executive. The executive will graciously help so Garcia can then be properly deported.
It’s unclear whether el Salvador has prosecution of the Ms 13 gang member for criminal conduct. Perhaps the judge can ask the executive to extradite him for deportation.
Garcia is an El Salvador national. Garcia has been remanded to the judge. Good luck judge.
^^^ addition. Garcia may be a Barrio 18 gang member 30-50,000 strong in southern California deadly enemies of MS 13. Garcia admitted Barrio 18 tried to recruit him.
Garcia entered illegally. Perhaps the the DOJ and HS should add Barrio 18 to the list.
Garcia illegally entered the US in 2011 from El Salvadora.
Uhm @anon… not exactly.
Here’s the issue.
He had his day in court. That judge ruled that he could be deported except to El Salvador.
Ooops.
Ok so what can the court ask Trump?
To help facilitate his release?
That’ may or may not happen.
I mean they could release him where he’s one of the many people in El Salvador, but Trump is footing the costs of their prison sentence.
Then 24hrs later… come pick him up for being a gang member and toss him back in… for a much longer term.
@Young
My guess, given how stupid and narcissistic some of these stupid judges are, is that the answer is, ‘Yes.’. Yes, they will. The modern DNC does nothing out of lockstep, or else, even to their own members.
You are not correct. He was here legally on a work permit and had been since 2019. https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-orders-trump-administration-advise-its-steps-return-wrongly-deported-2025-04-11/ Stop being a muppet. It is not “loony” to require the government to follow due process.
Another disgraceful judicial decision heading to some ash can somewhere.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/04/just-obama-judge-blocks-trump-admin-revoking-legal
Facilitation is government policy. See below for a definition.
https://www.ice.gov/doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/11061.1_current_policy_facilitating_return.pdf
Effectuation is not. Is Roberts saying that the judge can require the government to follow its own policy but cannot make policy himself by adding effectuation, which would intrude on Executive power?
That is how I read the SCOTUS order. Sauer referred to section 3.1 of that specific definition in his brief about what facilitation meant. The district judge didn’t get the message. Nor did she get the messages about deference to the President’s Article II powers over foreign policy or the limits on information he can be required to provide.
Judge rules Mahmoud Khalil can be deported!!!
He won’t be deported right away. There is still a court order holding his deportation so he can argue against the reason for his arrest.
Immigration judge Amee Comas asked for evidence against Khalil, but then determied she had no authority to question Rubio. Huh? Why bother with requesting evidence if she already knew she “couldn’t question” Rubio’s decision. Apparently the federal judge in New Jersey can and it seems he is the one who will question Rubio’s reasoning and evidence for arresting him.
There’s a reason why Khalil was sent to Texas, because judges there are friendly to the Trump administration’s views. We’ll see what the New Jersey Federal judge has to say.
@George
You are a partisan tw*t, and everything you say sounds like a temper tantrum. Most of us do not care. There are actual, honest, professions that would pay you better than The Troll Farm.
Actually, the Immigration Judge did not make a determination that Khalil can be deported.
She simply said that she does not have jurisdiction over the Department of State and therefore cannot overrule Rubio’s decision. She basically said she is unable to make a determination as to whether Khalil can be deported.
That most definitely does NOT end the matter.
Immigration Judges are not Article III judges. They are Administrative Law Judges appointed by the Attorney General. Unlike federal judges, they have limited powers. In this case, the judge does not have the power to question the Dept. of State. She has no jurisdiction over the federal government.
The case will ultimately be decided in New Jersey with an Article III federal judge who absolutely has jurisdiction over the Dept. of State. This judge has the power to overrule Rubio’s decision in the matter.
Actually she decided that Khalil is deportable.
This is a major hurdle in deporting him.
The case is not over and Khalil can appeal.
He still an illegal.
Uh he has a valid removal order but not to El Salvador. He stated in immigration court he entered illegally. That is the basis for the removal order that is still in effect. He appealed that to immigration board and lost. He is out of ammunition.
it seems the Trump administration is already in trouble with the judge in the Garcia case. The judge gave the DOJ a deadline to outline steps to bring back Garcia. The missed the deadline and asked for a delay. The judge gave them 2 extra hours. It’s odd that the government can whisk a deportee within hours of being arrested but can’t produce a plan to bring him back with all the resources they have at their disposal.
lol. And what are they going to do? Nothing is what they will do. Case in point, look at what the Supreme Court did when Biden abused the emergency powers act to unconstitutionally relieve student loan debt. Something even Pelosi said he couldn’t do. Was he arrested? Was he impeached?
No, nothing happened and he continued to do that!!! Last I time read about it, the illegal forgiveness was over $138 billion.
Moses
Good point. With the current squishy chicken-hearted Court, too many in other branches of government, and district courts and courts of appeal, and state governments are learning they might be able to ignore court decisions they don’t like. Colorado, for example, just passed a gun-control law that is likely unconstitutional but who cares? The ‘dignity’ of the Supreme Court is melting like hot wax. Maybe all of the ladies on the Court, and Roberts, can perform on Broadway as the ‘uncertain what is a woman not a biologist’ did. I expect their show would start as a comedy and end in tragedy.
Likely unconstitutional?
Shall not be infringed?
Do you mean to say that we are incapable of reading and comprehending English?
This is not complex.
Shall not be infringed.
Do, please, argue that.
Moses, the difference is Biden obeyed the court. He used a different legal route the court didn’t rule on to proceed with student loan forgivenes. Trump is directly ignoring court orders.
Biden spent billions of dollars that the Court found he had no constitutional power to spend.
“John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.”
– President Andrew Jackson, 1832
Is that really the kind of country you want to live in?
The Garcia case. One down, 14 millon to go. Independent Bob
One down, about 4 million to go.
“We have to take care of our farmers, the hotels and, you know, the various places where they tend to, where they tend to need people. So a farmer will come in with a letter concerning certain people, saying they’re great, they’re working hard. We’re going to slow it down a little bit for them, and then we’re going to ultimately bring them back. They’ll go out. They’re going to come back as legal workers.” — Donald Trump
SEASONAL WORK PERMITS like before! 14 MILLION TO GO!!
Don’t omit all the fraudulent claims to citizenship by illegal aliens whose parents were not under the jurisdiction of the U.S. and every last one of their descendants.
Flooding the system with lawsuits appears to be the Dems’ strategy to stop ICE from deporting very many people. We’ll be lucky if ICE can deport the worst of the worst. The average illegal immigrant will die of old age before the court system gets to their case. Meanwhile they’ll be voting Democrat and soaking up social services.
Carcia was taken into custody on March 12, His plane for El Salvador took off late March 15th.
That is LOTS of “hours”
SCOTUS said nothing about brining Garcia back. They said Xinis had the authority to order the executive to fascilitate his release.
Turley– “but what right does the district court have to manage the relations or communications with a foreign country?”
The Court had an opportunity to clarify the separation of powers and failed. The battles will continue and the likely result is that the respect for the Court and its reasoning and its powers will be diminished and the executive will be strengthened.
I want Trump’s hand on those controls but sooner or later we will get another Obama or Autopen President and will want a Court with clear and firm authority.
Both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate are responsible for this cowardly, squishy Court; the Democrats for nominating fools and Republicans for voting for them.
“Both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate are responsible for this cowardly, squishy Court; the Democrats for nominating fools and Republicans for voting for them.”
Young I assume you aren’t happy with Amy Coney Barrett. How would you avoid what you consider a bad decision?
S. Meyer– “How would you avoid what you consider a bad decision?”
I am sure you have thought about this and probably haven’t been much more successful than I have been.
The Democrat approach appears to be to ignore or evade Court decisions and that seems to include some district court judges and some in circuit courts.
Those who are legally conservative and want the legal system to be respected and strong have generally accepted Court decisions as being lawful. However, with the rulings from Critical Legal Theory judges who seem to smirk at actual law and precedent and the spineless Court’s failing to right the system, the judiciary is losing its strongest supporters, those who are legally conservative [not the same as politically conservative] while they have already lost the Critical Legal Theory left. Scholar Ilya Shapiro has warned of this outcome in his book LAWLESS.
In the end, the President may have to recognize that his oath to the Constitution compels him to interpret it independently of ‘woke’ and lawless judicial fiats.
With Trump the country would almost certainly be safe with that course of action but with an Obama or President Autopen we would be at risk so I would prefer that Trump not have to exercise that precedent. Of course, Jackson has already taken that course and Jefferson signaled Marshal that he would depending on the outcome of Marbury.
The Congress can also get involved. A fair number of bizarre and consequential court decisions; have revolved around a court’s twisted interpretation of a statute. It seems Congress could simply pass a law saying ‘No dummy, that’s not what we meant…we meant to say this.” That’s much more doable than amending the Constitution. Basically it would amend a judicial decision and remove a legal ambiguity.
In any event, with the judiciary getting increasingly tattered, Article I and Article II may have to hold things together.
Turbulent times. Thank you for asking an important question. The rest of the country may have to ponder what the answer may be.
Young, I am at a loss because I do not know enough about judicial appointments and lawyers. I agree that we should not choose judges based on political ideology.
My first consideration is that we pay greater attention to those at the beginning of the chain so that we have apolitical judges who are affine with the Constitution and the law. We must look toward the law schools and demand a greater affinity with US law, culture and the Constitution. I have found many lawyers to be insufficiently trained in critical thinking and cannot think outside the box. Many of my contracts involve things the lawyers never thought of.
Then, we have to separate those judges with compassion from the rest of the Judges. I met and liked Justice Sotomayor. She is a good woman and might be a very good judge, but the Supreme Court is not for her. She believes her heritage helps make her a better judge. In some instances, it might be, but we are not interested in that type of judge for those dealing with Constitutional interpretation.
My third thought, which might be garbage, is that no judge who worked in DC for an extended time should ever be appointed to the Supreme Court. That was my judgment against Kavanaugh (and others). I would not want any Supreme Court Judges from densely populated areas on either coast or near Chicago. I want a meat and potatoes Supreme Court Justices. I want people close to the earth.
Good 1st paragraph, Young. True
X
General Mike Flynn
@GenFlynn
Why hasn’t Stephan “The Walrus” Halper been arrested yet? And where is Jim Baker, the DOD Office of Net Assessment these days? He needs to be indicted or, at a minimum, be brought in for questioning. DOD Baker was Halper’s direct report…unless of course Halper was working directly for @JohnBrennan
(who clearly needs to be investigated!).
RUSSIA-GATE remains the crime of this century against America to date. The DOJ must move rapidly to tighten the circle around those who committed these treasonous acts.
I’m sick of it.
Enough is enough.
People must be held accountable!
_______________________________________
THE “WALRUS” WAS PLACED ON THE LIST A VERY LONG TIME AGO!
___________________________________________________________________________
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
___________________
“We will stop him.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page
_____________________________________________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
______________________________________________
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before 40.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI parmour Lisa Page
____________________________________________
“People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this [Trump] server.”
– Bill Priestap
________________
“I had a discussion with the case team and we believe there to be predication to include former President of the United States Donald J. Trump as a predicated subject.”
– Timothy Thibault to John Crabb, U.S. Attorney’s Office, D.C.
___________________________________________________________________
The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history. The co-conspirators are:
Kevin Clinesmith, Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann,
James Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Sally Yates,
James Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove,
Christopher Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper,
Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power,
Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama,
Joe Biden, James E. Boasberg, Emmet Sullivan, Gen. Milley, George Soros, John McCain,
Marc Elias, Igor Danchenko, Fiona Hill, Charles H. Dolan, Jake Sullivan, Strobe Talbot,
Cody Shear, Victoria Nuland, Ray “Red Hat” Epps, Don Berlin, Kathy Ruemmler, Rodney Joffe,
Paul Vixie, L. Jean Camp, Andrew Whitney, Lisa O. Monaco, Fani Willis, Alvin Bragg,
Matthew Colangelo, Merrick Garland, Juan Merchan, Timothy Thibault et al.
Deportation | A Writ of “Facilitation” | the Guillotine | What more could Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia ask for?
If you like the speed and diligence of ICE going after gangbangers like I do, you don’t want ICE to start making blunders.
It’s a question of the proportionality of consequences, and standards of evidence.
Once DoJ admitted to making a mistake in sending Garcia to supermax El Salvador, the right thing to do was to get him back in U.S. custody, and review the evidence. Was he more active in a gang in the past? Still active? What evidence?
Hearsay from a CI? Something more solid?
Then, the correct deportation consequences can be decided. Likely, end back to Caracas.
Our country’s reputation as a pillar of justice must be maintained, while diligently enforcing the law. There is no conflict between these, so why did this need to go to SCOTUS. It should have been cleared up by DoJ as soon as a mistake was detected. That’s the way to keep 80% support behind the so far highly successful campaign to drive foreigner gangsters out.
# . Garcia is Salvadoran. I think they want him…release for 5 seconds and arrest.
Arrest for WHAT? The government admitted he did not commit any crimes.
WHERE’S the proof that Garcia is a “gangbanger”? As a matter of fact, there’s NO evidence he ever committed any criminal offense–so why would you assume, as Turley does, that he IS a “gangbanger”? According to CBS News, there’s no evidence that 75% of those deported ever committed any criminal offense. Did MAGA media fail to mention these facts?
What is chilling here is the mendacity of the Trump administration and its syncophants to claim they can’t do anything and to avoid accountability. Explain to me, one of you MAGAts, how Kristi Noem could go in and out of the El Salvador prison, but they can’t get Garcia out? Explain to me WHY Trump is paying millions to El Salvador to incarcerate these people outside of the U S. The clear answer is: they don’t WANT to get him out because Trump can never be wrong. Pammy Jo Blondie fired the prosecutor who truthfully answered the judge’s question about what criminal offense Garcia committed and why he was deported–he admitted it was a “mistake”. Since when is a prosecutor supposed to lie to keep his job? The Rules of Professional Conduct for prosecuting attorneys do not include lying to cover up a mistake or because a narcissistic liar, like Trump, can never admit he is wrong. Here’s what the ABA has to say on the subject of the duties of prosecutors–in relevant part:
“Standard 3-1.2 Functions and Duties of the Prosecutor
(a) The prosecutor is an administrator of justice, a zealous advocate, and an officer of the court. The prosecutor’s office should exercise sound discretion and independent judgment in the performance of the prosecution function.
(b) The primary duty of the prosecutor is to seek justice within the bounds of the law, not merely to convict. The prosecutor serves the public interest and should act with integrity and balanced judgment to increase public safety both by pursuing appropriate criminal charges of appropriate severity, and by exercising discretion to not pursue criminal charges in appropriate circumstances. The prosecutor should seek to protect the innocent and convict the guilty, consider the interests of victims and witnesses, and respect the constitutional and legal rights of all persons, including suspects and defendants.”
Article 2, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
The entirety of executive power is vested exclusively in the president.
No legislation may exercise any aspect, facet, degree or amount of executive power.
No adjudication may exercise any aspect, facet, degree or amount of executive power.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Article I, Section 1
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 1, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 3, Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
Typo – Article 2
While Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution vests executive power in the president, that does not mean the president holds supreme authority. The Constitution was written specifically to avoid such concentrated power. The framers had just fought a revolution against monarchy, and they built a government defined by limits, checks, and balances. The president’s powers are real, but they are carefully bounded. For example, the president cannot make laws. That power belongs to Congress. The president cannot declare war, spend money without congressional approval, or appoint officials and judges without the Senate’s consent. Even actions like negotiating treaties require a two-thirds vote in the Senate. Beyond that, the president can be impeached and removed from office for serious misconduct, as spelled out in Article II, Section 4. The judiciary also plays a vital role. The Supreme Court has the power to strike down executive actions that violate the Constitution, a principle firmly established in American law. In addition, the Constitution itself is clear that the president, like any citizen, is subject to the rule of law. The Bill of Rights and later amendments ensure that no president can violate fundamental liberties or due process. In short, the Constitution does not crown a king. It creates a president, powerful yes, but within a system that constantly limits, checks, and holds that power accountable.
For those of you in Rio Linda, you’re simply going to have to find a workaround – a workaround related to actual law not things you make up as you go along:
_______________________________________________________________________________________
The entirety of executive power is vested exclusively in the president.
No legislation may exercise any aspect, facet, degree or amount of executive power.
No adjudication may exercise any aspect, facet, degree or amount of executive power.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Article I, Section 1
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 3, Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
“John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.”
– President Andrew Jackson, 1832
What? Our media and left have been misrepresenting ANOTHER story? I am shocked. Shocked, I tell you. 😂
James,
Right? Hard to believe MSM would lie, yet again.
James,
See this one? Exclusive: NSA director told FBI Pulitzer-winning WaPo story on Russian collusion hoax was ‘wrong’
” The Washington Post and New York Times won Pulitzer Prizes for their numerous stories on false claims of Trump-Russia collusion. Declassified interview notes from Crossfire Hurricane now show Admiral Mike Rogers shot down one of those stories behind closed doors.”
https://justthenews.com/government/white-house/wrong-trump-nsa-director-shot-down-wapo-story-russian-collusion-hoax
For the life of me, I don’t see why an illegal alien is allowed to petition a US Court for due process. How does that person have standing and be recognized to have citizenship rights? The mere fact of their residence shouldn’t bestow those rights.
apbd
From my understanding, in the constitution the words are supposed to mean the same throughout.
Every place they use Person in the constitution it is supposed to have the same definition.
Person does not mean citizen but everyone, including citizens from other countries.
So every where Person is mentioned, including the 5th criminal procedure rights and the 14th due process rights, it includes everyone, not just citizens of the U.S.
All persons SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES, for example, subject to being summoned for jury duty, are citizens.
14th Amendment
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
That’s 14A.3, which by its text creates a subset of “persons” who are entitled to citizenship. The due process clause is broader in that it applies to any person, citizen or not. That’s true in the 14th Amendment, but it’s also true of the 5th Amendment which is at issue here (both contain a due process clause, one applicable to the states, the other applicable to the federal government).
The 5th Amendment states: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The bolded text above shows that the federal government may not deprive any person (citizen or not) of liberty or property without due process of law. Here, there is a constitutionally-protected liberty or property interest in avoiding deportation. That means at least some process is required before the federal government may deport someone. However, the process required – the “process that’s due” – may not be very elaborate.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-5/removal-of-aliens-who-have-entered-the-united-states#fn1amd5
I agree; persons it is. However, there is not much “due process” available to an illegal alien.
While you are not strictly correct, that does not matter.
What is the due process you are entitled to if you fail to signal a lane change and are pulled over ?
Do you get a full jury trial ? Is proof beyond a reasonable doubt required ?
The 5th amendment is about criminal rights – there is not a single deportee that is being charged with a crime and tried for that crime in the US.
Illegal immigrants have no right to be within the US. The required due process is the oportunity to prove that they DO have a legal right to be in the US.
Even a US citizen has the due process rights to establish that they are a US citizen if they are picked up in an ICE raid and presumed to be here illegally.
While your claim is obviously false – the US in not obligated to assure the due process rights of Venezeulans in Venezeula and while the US Tries to protect the rights of citizens outside the US – we nearly always fail.
The US constitution is not a grant of power or duty for the government of they united states across everyone everywhere in the world.
If the US government suspects that you are in the US illegally, it has the power to remove you.
The due process required to do so is proving that you do not have a legal right to be in the US.
The standard of proof is NOT beyond a reasonable doubt. Being deported does NOT mean being sent to San Quentin,
it means be sent back to your home country.
You can be deported back to your home country. Being deported to a supermax prison for an indefinite term should be reserved for the most heinous criminal aliens. It is a dangerous abuse of state power short of those extreme circumstances.
# . Garcia IS Salvadoran. Just reason him in El Salvador. Scotus said to do that but el Salvador may have an interest in Mr. Garcia. When they’re done he’ll be released.
@John
Thank you for bringing it up; being arrested is not being ‘kidnapped’ (everyone knows you are in jail, and likely which one), and being deported is not being ‘disappeared’. People here temporarily do not have precisely the same rights as natural born citizens, and I think that’s fine. Any other country on earth, if you violate your visa, you are out with barely enough time to pack your bags. The damage done by the left in this regard in America is tough to even calculate; we are finally finding out. I am really ok with all of it, even with the court blips.
This has all been way out of control and distorted for far too long, and given the outright hostile response to deporting people in the cartels tells me some have made their fortunes in ways that did not involve ‘insider trading’.
# yes, tourists overstaying will be deported as policy. There’s no due process involved. 😂.
@Anonymous
Anyone on a visa is in effect, a ‘tourist’. They have a timetable.
Have you read the 5th Amendment? All persons are afforded due process.
Don’t like it? Then pass a constitutional amendment.
Correct – if you are suspected of being in the US illegally -= you can be arrested, Where you are entitled to a hearing before an Article II Judge,
where the US govenrment must prove to a fairly low standard that you are here illegally, and you have the oportunity to challenge the govenrments evidence or to present evidence of your own.
If the government meets its burden of proof, the court orders you deported,
depending on various immigration laws you may have a right to appeal – even to the supreme court – if they choose to take the case.
If you are being deported under the AEA – which only applies to TdA members – you have the right to a Habeaus hearing, and little more.
If you are arrested within 100miles of a US border – you have little due process rights beyond that hearing before an Article II judge.
Again deportation means you are being sent home.
Lets assume that you are actually a US citizen accidentally picked up in an ICE raid and for some reason you are unable to produce any evidence to rebut the governments claim that you are in the US illegally. This is extremely rare – but it has happened.
So you get deported after your hearing. You are still free to contact friends, family, or go to a US embassy and optain a copy of your passport or other proof that you are a US citizen and return to the US.
We would all like government to be perfect – but it is not. The famous aphorism is better that 10 guilty men go free than one innocent is punished.
That aphorism does NOT say “better that ALL guilty go free rather than any inocent person is punished”
We do not live in utopia. The goal of our system is to get things right most of the time.
Your due process rights are greatest if the governemnt is trying to execute you.
They are least if they are giving you a parking ticket.
So a “person” in East Timor is allowed to claim rights under the U.S. Constitution?
No, the US Constitution’s applicability does not reach beyond US territory. So, in E. Timor the 5th Amendment does not apply.
But an illegal alien from East Timor who is in America has constitutional rights?
It’s an interesting question. When it comes to due process, I believe they are still entitled to some process. For example, suppose it’s a case of mistaken identity. They get at least some basic opportunity to show why the government is mistaken. Otherwise, the government can just start deporting anyone they say should be deported and could make some mistakes. If after some kind of hearing it turns out the government is not mistaken, then fine, the government gets to proceed.
The commonly-understood maximum consequence for non-criminal alien is deportation to the home country.
Sending an alien to a supermax prison for an indefinite term? Without an evidence hearing? Is that in any way proportional?
We’re doing GREAT so far with ICE crackdown. Let’s keep this option going — which means denying the Exec. absolute, unchallengeable powers of offshore incarceration.
That issue is complex, and unclear.
TdA members are more similar to prisoners of war – they are entitled to more rights than criminals.
But we do not typically return prisoners to the country we are at war with.
Further in the case of TdA Venezeula refused to accept its citizens back.
Garcia is more complex. Despite left wing angst there is zero doubt that the US could legitimately deport him.
the “administrative error” was deporting him specifically to El Salvador. There was a court order preventing his return to El Salvador,
But Garcia could have been sent anywhere else that would accept him.
The order blocking his deportation to El Salvador was expiring, and equally relevant the gang that he feared had been eleiminated so the basis for the protection order was gone. Further the protective order was granted based on the exectuive powers of the president – not immigration law. Gargia was NOT granted asylum – that has a much higher standard that he could not have met.
Because the protective order was granted based on the presidents executive power it could be revoked by the president.
Trump has revoked most illegal immigrants protective status.
Garcia was then imprisoned when he reached El Salvador.
That poses a different question – Who imprisoned him ?
If the US imprisoned him in El Salvador, then he is entitled to significant due process.
But if El Salvador imprisoned him, it is none of our business.
“ The order blocking his deportation to El Salvador was expiring, and equally relevant the gang that he feared had been eleiminated so the basis for the protection order was gone.”
False, Garcia was here legally. DOJ admitted he committed no crime or violated any of his requirements. He was accused of being a gang member with no proof. A court order stopping his deportation so Garcia could challenge the accusation was ignored. Trump paid El Salvador $6 million ( a bribe ) to house immigrants that were difficult to deport to their home country.
The gang that Garcia was fleeing from was NOT eliminiated. It’s been reported that the gang he was fleeing from was incarcerated in the same prison where he was sent. It would not be difficult for Trump to bring him back and face a proper hearing. Trump could do the same thing he always does when he wants something done. Threaten to withhold money.
The Trump administration is pushing for quick deportations and meeting his goals on deportation numbers by bypassing due process. The strategy is to move deportees or detainees around secretly so no court or detainnee has any chance to contest or review the arrest and avoid the annoying and costly due process rights.
The Supreme Court waffled on it’s ruling by making it as vague as they could to insinuate that the adminstration has to bring him back, but it has to do it on it’s own and we know they won’t and the court knows they won’t. This becomes an issue of the Trump administration regularly ignoring court orders and acting in defiance of court orders because they know they can get away with it.
# . Garcia is Ms 13 wanted by his home nation of El Salvador and seeking asylum in the US from the police. 😂
So a “person” in East Timor is allowed to claim rights under the U.S. Constitution?
I can’t help but wonder if something else is going on here. Did El Salvador, perhaps, lose him?
Bingo
Professor Turley,
Abrego Garcia is only being held by El Salvador because the US government wants him to and is paying the Salvadoran government to incarcerate him and other deportees. The foreign government in question is essentially a bought and paid for agent of the US. Outsourcing imprisonment cannot be get-out-of-jail-free card for the executive – or in this case, a put-in-jail-free card.
When the president contracts with a foreign leader to imprison people at the behest of the United States, the US government retains full legal responsibility for that imprisonment. And if the imprisonment turns out to be illegal, it has a duty to put an end to it by, no less than if the person was incarcerated by the US directly. “Outsourcing” cannot be used to circumvent constitutional constraints on government power – especially not when liberty is so gravely threatened. Neither can it be used to circumvent legal restrictions on deportation – itself a severe constraint on liberty.
If Trump’s admin fails to provide evidence of its attempts to bring him back, the Court should be able to review the contract with Cecot to see what contractual rights the government has with respect to a prisoner. This wouldn’t be necessary with any other administration. But the problem in these cases has to do with the “presumption of regularity” i.e., the assumption that, all things being equal, government officers act lawfully and government lawyers act truthfully. But in this very case, the Trump admin suspended career DOJ lawyers because they had the temerity to be candid with Judge Xinis. They have openly defined government orders on multiple fronts. Indeed, the DOJ’s official statement claimed a victory for Trump. This is not normal. And therefore the Trump administration should no longer have the deference afforded to other administrations.
A world in which the government’s actions undermine its claims to a presumption of regularity has profound consequences. It puts an intense strain on the adversarial nature of the legal system. It has a corrosive internal effect on government itself, particularly on the DOJ and its lawyers. And, if courts cannot apply the presumption, it could weaken the judiciary, in both the short and long terms. Finally, and most worrying, when the presumption of regularity reaches the Supreme Court, the court may transform the presumption of regularity into a rule of mandatory deference, facts be damned.
“Abrego Garcia is only being held by El Salvador because the US government wants him to and is paying the Salvadoran government to incarcerate him and other deportees. The foreign government in question is essentially a bought and paid for agent of the US. Outsourcing imprisonment cannot be get-out-of-jail-free card for the executive – or in this case, a put-in-jail-free card.”
Most of your claims are actual unknown.
TdA members are being incarcerated in El Salvador at the behest and payment of the US government. And they are receiving the Due Process they are entitled to.
The left ranted correctly that the AEA is a War Powers act. But they incorrectly ranted that it required a congressional declaration of war.
It did not.
TdA members are being held in El Salvador essentially as prisoners of war. The will be returned to Venezeula where that govenrment can do as it pleases when it agrees to US terms for “peace” – that would likely be an end to their efforts to disrupt the US via sponsoring a “predatory incursion”
Garcia is an MS-13 member – not a TdA member. The Article II court finding that he is an MS13 member is Binding on the Article II courts – Garcia allowed his right to appeal that finding to expire.
But that finding does NOT meet the standards necescary to incarcerate him.
Judge Xinis is entitled to inquire into why Garcia is incarcerated in El Salvador.
The US govenrment does not have the constitutional power to incarcerate anyone who is not convicted of a crime or is a prisoner of war.
Garcia is neither.
But Garcia is El Salvadoran. And El Salvador can incarcerate him based on their laws.
We do NOT at this time know why Garcia is incarcerated in El Salvador.
There is gitmo
The fired DOJ lawyers were fired for LYING to the court.
Contra media claims – Garcia is an illegal immigrant. He has a final court finding that he is an MS13 leader.
DOJ was NOT obligrated to provide Evidence of the basis for that finding to Xinis. That finding was made years ago by legitimate courts, Garcia appealed, lost and when he failed to continue that appeal they finding of the court became final.
It is no longer reviewable by other courts.
You can be unhappy with the basis for the finding – though you shoudl not trust the MSM or Judge Xinis’s claims regarding that – the ACtual evidence and orders are readily available online.
You can dislike the standard of proof required ot the conclusions of the court based on the proof provided – if so CHANGE THE LAW.
The finding is final. The fired DOJ lawyer failed to properly represent that to Judge Xinis and instead claimed there was little or no basis,
and blamed his superiors for failing to provide him with information that he could easily have gleaned from Garcia’s files – or a simple google search.
The position of DOJ was clear – Garcia is an MS13 gang leader. The ccourts already decided tht and it is not reviewable,
and he is subject to immediate deportation.
That is the facts, that is the law, and Judge Xinis has no power to change that.
Judges do not have the power to review final decisions of courts more than 5 years ago.
Due process does NOT require that the govenrment reprove its case over and over t a long chain of judges over the ocurse of decades until a defendant gets a judge that rules statisfacotrialy.
You rant about “regular order” – Judge Xinis is acting far outside “regular order”. She is acting as a defense attorney not a judge.
Garcia has defense attorney’s Theya re allowed to get the law wrong.
The US attorney in question was terminated for excellent cause. He was unfamiliar with the case and unfamiliar with the law and he was undermining the government case in court – he was either lying or incompetent.
Where’s the “court finding that he is an MS13 leader”?
I have no idea what you are trying to say with the rest of this…
There is only one issue that Judge Xinis has some jurisdiction over.
And that is whether Garcia is being incarcerated in El Salvador for a crime committed in the US and under the control of the US government.
You are free to distruct the government – and you are correct that the government lied to the court.
The problem is it is the attorney that was fired who lied. He lied when he failed to tell the court that Garcia was determined to be an MS13 gang leader by multiple courts and that finding was final 5 years ago when Garcia abandoned his appeals.
The question of whether Garcia is an MS13 gang leader is no longer within the Purview of Judge Xinis.
Next Garcia was deported LEGALLY. There was no error administrative or otherwise in deporting him.
The administrative error was deporting him to El Salvador without allowing the protective order to expire or revoking it – which the administration had the power to do unilaterally – the Protective order was an excercise of Article II power – NOT immigration law.
It is revokable by the president – again without review.
But given that that order was in effect at the time he was deported, he could not be deported to El Salvador.
He could have been deported anywhere else that would take him.
Judge Xinis can review his deportation to El Salvador – but not his deportation itself.
You and others have raised the question of why he is incarcerated in El Salvador.
TdA members can be incarcerated under the AEA.
Other illegal immigrants can be detained in the US until deported, or jailed in the US when convicted of a crime.
WE do not know why Garcia is incarcerated in El Salvador.
The US can not control his incarceration in El Salvador without convicting him of crime with the requisite due process.
At the same time US courts have no jurdsdiction over what El Salvador does with its own citizens.
You argue about contracts – that actually is irrelevant.
Judge Xinis can order the US to terminate any contract it has with El Salvador for the incarceration of Garcia.
But she can NOT order El Salvador to return him.
“ The problem is it is the attorney that was fired who lied. He lied when he failed to tell the court that Garcia was determined to be an MS13 gang leader by multiple courts and that finding was final 5 years ago when Garcia abandoned his appeals.”
Wrong, the DOJ has no evidence of their claim. Garcia was here legally. The attorney was fired because he admitted to the court that the DOJ was aware of the court order preventing Garcia’s deportation.
There was an outstanding deportation order in effect from 2019, and he only claimed asylum after the order
There is no basis for which he would qualify for asylum and still should be deported
The only error was that based on his questionable claim of asylum, he could not be returned to El Salvador.
The us should simply ask for his release from prison and be left in El Salvador as there was a valid deportation order in effect