Alien Enemies Act - Trump Defies 9 - 0 Suprme Court Ruling

he heard about that $3k ipone and how everyone from anarchist to zealot would hate him if he tripled the price of their phone.

 

so Kahlil failed to disclose a year of employment in a position that has never been groundsf or refusal of a visa before.

technically, that failure to disclose allows the Louisiana judge in a box to legally green light his deportation.

never, ever, has the position to which he was employed been considered a national security threat.

this is how petty this man is MAGA. Proud ??

Trump administration claims Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil misrepresented information on green card application - ABC News

"The additional charges the government filed last week are completely meritless," Marc Van Der Hout, whose legal firm represents Khalil, told ABC News in response to a request for comment. "They show that the government has no case whatsoever on this bogus charge that his presence in the U.S. would have adverse foreign policy consequences. This case is purely about First Amendment protected activity and speech, and U.S. citizens and permanent residents alike are free to say what they wish about what is going on in the world."

"Regardless of his allegations concerning political speech, Khalil withheld membership in certain organizations and failed to disclose continuing employment by the Syria Office in the British Embassy in Beirut when he submitted his adjustment of status application. It is black-letter law that misrepresentations in this context are not protected speech," the government said in the filing.

During a State Department briefing Monday, spokesperson Tammy Bruce was asked multiple times about whether the department now viewed prior work for UNRWA as grounds for disqualification for visa applicants -- but she repeatedly declined to answer.

"If you lie in your efforts to come to the United States to get a visa for any reason, or for a green card, maybe there haven't been repercussions, or we haven't done things properly in the past. A lot of things have changed with the election of Donald Trump," Bruce said in a general statement during the briefing.

 

Roberts, you're up

admin just told the Supremes to bugger off..

claims that the contract with el salvador is classified and not subject to review...MAGA, you backing this?

who do they hold in contempt? Rubio?

'Defiant screw you': Expert stunned as Trump admin 'thumbs its nose' at Supreme Court

"THERE'S MORE: In a separate filing, the government says its arrangement with El Salvador to house deportees in the notorious CECOT prison is classified," Cheney wrote Sunday. The filings also claim that the Supreme Court's recent ruling "doesn't compel it to actually seek" the man's release from the prison, and instead only requires the government "to let him into US if he manages to get out," according to fellow Politico reporter Josh Gerstein.

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at American Immigration Council, said, "The Trump administration thumbs its nose at the Supreme Court, saying that there is nothing the judge can do to order them to bring Mr. Abrego back." "They also refuse to provide any information on the deal with Bukele, claiming it’s classified and maybe also a state secret," he added.

"Today's filings are a defiant 'screw you' to Judge Xinis. They say they can't 'facilitate' anything because Mr. Abrego is in Bukele's custody, they threaten to appeal any order she makes requiring further steps, and they refuse to tell her anything," Reichlin-Melnick said.

He continued: "The Supreme Court held 9-0 that Judge Xinis’s 'order properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador.' Her order was also upheld 3-0 by the 4th Circuit."
"Now Trump admin defiantly says they won’t work to have him released," he then added.

 

this is ludicrous on its face

Trump administration contends it has no duty to return illegally deported man to US

The Trump administration insisted Sunday that it has no legal obligation to arrange for the return of a Maryland man illegally deported from the United States, arguing that a Supreme Court ruling last week only requires officials to admit him into the country if he makes it back from a high-security prison in El Salvador.

Justice Department lawyers told a federal judge that they don’t interpret the Supreme Court’s Thursday ruling — that the administration “facilitate” Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release — as obligating the administration to do anything more than adjust his immigration status to admit him if El Salvador’s government chooses to release him.

With El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele set to meet President Donald Trump Monday, DOJ attorneys argued the courts have no power to require the administration to engage with the Salvadoran government to reach a diplomatic solution. They contend such a potential order would amount to a violation of the separation of powers and an intrusion into what they allege is unfettered presidential power to conduct foreign relations.

“All of those requested orders involve interactions with a foreign sovereign — and potential violations of that sovereignty,” Justice Department attorneys wrote in a seven-page submission to U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis. “[A] federal court cannot compel the Executive Branch to engage in any mandated act of diplomacy or incursion upon the sovereignty of another nation.”

 

Ez for states to refuse to put him on the ballot. Trump vs Supreme will be decided before then

 

Not getting that case heard was a big Biden failure

 

seems like the next thing is to issue a clear order that requires them to produce him by timne certain or be held in contempt. next round sanction the attorneys who show up with a bs excuse. next round hold the SOS in contempt.

hopefully this sours the court even more on djt and his little nazi miller

now we know why most of the sr attorneys at DOJ with history of supreme court appearances resigned.

jmo..

What Courts Can Do If the Trump Administration Defies Court Orders | Brennan Center for Justice

Issuing stricter orders

Before starting contempt proceedings, a judge who believes that a party is not adhering to a court order will often reiterate the order and identify specific benchmarks the party must meet to demonstrate compliance. We have already seen an example of this process play out in 2025. After plaintiffs challenged Trump’s executive order freezing federal grants and loans, U.S. District Judge John McConnell issued a temporary restraining order requiring officials to unfreeze the funds. Several days later, the plaintiffs complained that the funds remained frozen, and the government’s lawyers argued that the administration was following its reading of the court’s “ambiguous” order. McConnell ultimately determined that the Trump administration had violated the “plain language” of his “clear and unambiguous” order. He stopped short of finding the government in contempt, but he laid out in greater detail the funds that the government must restore to comply with his earlier order.

If litigants have exhausted all other means to get the government to take action, they can also ask a court to issue a writ of mandamus, a rarely used (or needed) court order that compels a government official or employee to perform a legally required act. Courts’ power to issue writs of mandamus is codified in federal law, which expressly recognizes courts’ authority to consider mandamus actions against federal officers or employees. However, courts can only compel officials to perform their nondiscretionary and purely ministerial duties, such as disbursing funds that are owed to a party.

Sanctioning attorneys

Courts also have broad disciplinary authority over attorneys and can sanction them for helping their clients deliberately defy a court order. Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for example, a court can sanction attorneys who submit filings for an improper purpose, such as to cause unnecessary delay or knowingly make legally unsound arguments. The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, meanwhile, empower the appellate courts to discipline attorneys for “conduct unbecoming a member of the bar or for failure to comply with any court rule.” Penalties can include fines, but judges can also go as far as to suspend or disbar attorneys for their refusal to cooperate.

Who do courts rely on to enforce orders?
While federal judges have clear authority to order sanctions, including fines and arrest, they ultimately rely on law enforcement and federal prosecutors to enforce penalties in the face of continued noncompliance. The U.S. Marshals Service, which is part of the Justice Department, is the primary enforcement arm of the federal courts. Courts often rely on marshals to serve summonses, subpoenas, and warrants, as well as make arrests, and by law, “it is the primary role and mission of the United States Marshals Service to . . . obey, execute, and enforce all orders of” the federal courts.

 

state prosecutors need to file some charges against some ice agents and help them understand that following unlawful orders is not a defense.

 

briefs were filed by the admin over the weekend. supremes now have to rule on the briefs. the first order was unsigned but unanimous. the language and who signs and who doesn't will be interesting. djt or more likely miller is trying to ferret out the true loyalists to determine if it is a 5-4 split on the most outrageous bogus claims or is it going to go 7-2? or issue another unsigned, but clearer order to return him without a timeline. that is what i suspect will happen