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

Of course Trump could have the man sent back. Either of his usual methods--the carrot or the stick--would work. Threats, bullying, whatever. Trump could have him on the next plane out of El Salvador. Trump has already admitted the screw-up, now he's like "oh, well, watcha gonna do?" Utterly helpless before the might of El Presidente? Doesn't seem like his style. The only thing that that explains Trump's utter lack of interest and action is that he doesn't want the man back. If it were someone he valued, he would have invaded El Salvador by now.

 

Stop lying. Abrego Garcia has not been found to be a gang member by a single court, let alone two. In his initial hearing in 2019, there was an anonymous accusation and testimony by a gang police officer that he was an MS-13 gang member, based on him wearing a Bulls jersey. But upon the full hearing, the judge found Abrego Garcia was not a gang member, and his fear of being persecuted by gangs in El Salvador was more than credible to give him protective, LEGAL status, and release him from custody. Does this sound like someone two courts found to be a gang member?

As for your hypothetical, show me the evidence. If 20 years ago, it's found there's a conviction, or an arrest based on the evidence, then yes, that person should be deported. But when there is no evidence, no criminal record, and a judge releasing a person and giving him protected status, then that person deserves the due process as prescribed by the Constitution.

 

There are none so blind as those who choose not to see. A loose translation from 1535... John Heywood.

 

The cop who accused Garcia of being MS-13 was suspended soon after (and subsequently indicted) for giving case details to a prostitute that he was frequenting at the time. That means that the cop accusing him of being a gang member has a longer criminal record than he does.

PGPD News: Grand Jury Indicts Suspended Officer
Trump’s Case Against Man Deported in “Error” Just Took Another Big Hit | The New Republic

 

The President is not governed by the Supreme Court.

Am I right? Typical and normal depending on your gag reflex.

 

So you're saying people don't pay to get to a place in the wall where they can cross? You mean to tell me these women and children are making these trips by themselves? These people are paying to get to and through the border and are being extorted by the cartels. You can check my thoughts on immigration. Im all for legal immigration and giving the law abiding ones that are over here an easy path. However, having a freely open border like Biden and some of you want just causes more problems for these people than solutions. Some of your politicians couldn't care less because they know its more possible votes and those who vote with their party will die on that hill even though some of you claim to be all about being humanitarians. Most of you are just opportunists like the politicians and see them as an easy way to get what you want pushed through.

Those policies and failing and you can see that in states like New York. You can also see the deportation of gang members is helping in those very same places. Imagine that... if you deport a ton of criminals like you mean it, crime slowly goes away.

Again, be careful addressing me because we agree on more than we disagree on with regards to immigration but some of you are just toeing the party line and aren't being consistent with what you care about as opposed to what you let slide as acceptable collateral damage.

Like I said, both sides like their own flavor of collateral damage. You're agruing over which humans should be protected more and so far it seems like y'all are on the side of the gangs. Good luck with that.

 

Its a shame that this kid and probably more were caught up in this. I havent read the whole story so I cant comment specifically but there is collateral damage on both sides. I'd rather be on the side where a couple unfortunate instances where a non gang member is deported rather than let them run rampant as they are able to do in sanctuary cities like New York. Again its your choice and you have to live with which side you take.

 

It's not a binary choice between "deport criminals/gang member with a handful of unfortunate innocent people" and "let gang members/criminals roam free." There's a very viable middle ground to provide some due process for people to defend themselves against being wrongfully accused. Especially when the consequence of getting it wrong is effectively sentencing people to death at a dangerous prison in another country.

 

No, I am telling you that the reason that they are paying is because the border isn't "open." If it was "open" they wouldn't need a place in a wall that they can cross. They could just cross wherever they felt like it. The reason that Coyotes have a business is because a person can't do it on their own.

How many people were deported with an "open border." The words "open border" are ridiculously false. We spend billions every single year on patrolling a border. If a border is "open," you don't do that.

Now as to what I would like, I am one of the few people that actually likes the concept of (mostly) open borders because I believe in markets. The reason people come here is largely because of labor shortages. If we have a labor shortage, as we had for most of Biden's time in office, more people will come. I don't want stupid quotas or other policies to centrally plan immigration. I would rather the number of jobs determine the immigration rate and avoid the massive government expenditures from a militarized border and the distortions in the labor market from the central planning of immigration.

My ideas are more Cato Institute on Immigration than they are to either party.

Crime has been decreasing for years now. And not that slowly.

As of now, the deportation rate has been slower than it was under Biden.

Yeah, I am the one toeing the party line. I explicitly want what neither party wants, a market-based border policy.

No, I am arguing in favor of the notion of due process and against the power of the state to send people to gulags in foreign countries. I will continue to argue against authoritarianism, which is what that is.

 

In 1769, William Blackstone wrote it is better for 10 guilty men to go free than 1 innocent person to suffer. Our founding fathers were aware and created a system of jurisprudence where convicting a person was supposed to be difficult. Accused are innocent until proven guilty, have the right to face their accusers, see and examine all evidence against them, and are only guilty is 12 jury members of their peers find as such beyond the shadow of a doubt.

Pol Pot, on the other hand, prescribed to the notion it was better for one innocent person be harmed rather than 10 guilty go free.

A man with legal status in the US is now in prison in El Salvador for what reason? He has brown skin and wore Chicago Bulls clothing? Not good enough. Not in the US, where we're all supposed to have due process under Constitutional protections. But I guess it's OK if you don't mind living under authoritarian dictatorship rule?

 

He wasn't deported. He was sent to prison in a non-native country.

 

Im not going to get in an argument about semantics. Biden did little to nothing to secure the border. It was essentially wide open. Pick whatever way you want to call it. The reason you cant have this has nothing to do with the Mexican people. Its about the fact that young military aged men can slip in undetected. You cant just let that happen without being vetted. I imagine you don't just open your home up and allow anyone in either.

The information is out there. If you look around outside of the typical news sources. Watch someone like Cash Jordan on Youtube who gives a unique perspective on whats actually happening inside New York during this time. He offers a fair and pretty unbiased perspective on things IMO.

Im well aware crime has been declining for decades. That is different than major change over a year and historic numbers. Imagine that - if you actually start to enforce laws and hold bad people accountable, crime seems to vanish in thin air.

NYPD ANNOUNCES HISTORIC CRIME REDUCTIONS IN FIRST QUARTER OF 2025 WITH FEWEST SHOOTING INCIDENTS IN

 

Which is definitely unfortunate but what collateral damage are you willing to take? Innocent women and children by the hundres/thousands or a couple unfortunately mistakes with possible gang/cartel members? I know which side Im on and its not really close.

Should the actual gang and cartel members that are going to a "prison in a non-native country" be simply deported? Or are they ok to actually have consequences for their actions?

 

Spent billions of dollars on both CBP salaries and capital projects on the border.

I'll call it a heavily militarized border. Because that is what it is.

The reason it happens: because our immigration system doesn't care what the labor needs in the US are. And I don't care what gender the person crossing is.

The whole "you wouldn't let them in your home" thing is such a bad and emotional argument. I also don't let my next door neighbor in my shower with me. We have levels of privacy. I have no problem with a military aged Mexican man (for some reason, we are talking about Mexicans now when most immigrants aren't Mexican) being a neighbor.

I don't get my news from YouTube commentators. That is the NYC is dying dude, right? Seems less even handed than you are letting on.

Crime has been declining for decades. It has declined rapidly starting in about 2022/2023 depending on the locale.

Yes, if we got rid of all the people, crime would end. But the reality is that murders in NYC started declining rapidly in 2022. If you cut it to a monthly rolling total, it actually peaked in May 2021 and then declined rapidly from there. It had little to do with immigration numbers, as murders and many other crimes were declining even as immigration was increasing.

 

1.) How many people were deported from the five Borroughs?
2.) How many of them actually committed crimes?
3.) Your source doesn’t cite deportation as a reason for the reductions. Why did you ignore this in your source?

“While today’s numbers show crime continues to plummet across the five boroughs, today’s drop is nothing new — we have seen five straight quarters of declining crime, including the past six months. Thanks to the tens of thousands of brave men and women of the NYPD, New York City remains the safest big city in America, and we are only getting safer."

These sustained declines were fueled by the NYPD’s precision policing model, which places officers in areas experiencing the highest concentrations of crime — known as Violence Reduction Zones. In the first quarter, major crime in these zones dropped 25% compared to the same period last year, underscoring the impact of strategic, data-driven enforcement.

Officers continued to carry out complex, street-level investigations that removed more than 1,300 illegal firearms from communities citywide this year — including untraceable, 3-D printed “ghost guns.” These gun recoveries directly contributed to a 26.6% (47 vs. 64) drop in shooting incidents in March, and an even sharper 51.4% (17 vs. 35) decrease in homicides.

These crime reduction efforts extended into New York City’s public housing developments, where overall crime dropped 12.2% (445 vs. 507) in March 2025 and fell 11.1% (1,302 vs. 1,464) for the first quarter.​

 

There’s something called due process to ensure the correct people are deported. They can be detained here in the US while that happens. What you offer is a false dichotomy.

As for your second paragraph, I have no problem with people suffering the consequences of the crimes they’ve committed once proven, but that isn't what’s happening. If they committed a crime on record they would be convicted and sitting in US jails/prisons. Further, you can’t say they’re gang members because no due process has been followed to determine that. Even if there’s a gang affiliation, which may be enough to deport someone, it doesn’t mean they are subject to imprisonment in a foreign country’s prison. They can be deported with decency to their home country. It’s not that difficult; the current policies are in place with a single goal in mind: be as cruel as possible to deter future attempts to immigrate to the US.

 

For your sake I hope other people aren't so flippant about dismissing your constitutional rights as you are about dismissing other people's.

 

The sad part is the people that are cheering us on are acting like they are planning to expand this to US citizens

 

DOJ fired the lawyer who argued the case of Kilmar Garcia.

Justice Department fires immigration lawyer who argued case of mistakenly deported man

 

Correcting my earlier post to note that Abrego Garcia is in fact Salvadorian. He still didn't receive due process of course, but my line about him being sent to a non-native country was wrong.