Trump administration concedes Maryland father from El Salvador was mistakenly deported

The Legislative branch of government writes the laws. The Executive branch carries out the laws. The Judicial branch gets to interpret the law and decides what is or is not Constitutional. This is what we all should have learned in grade school!

This means the Judicial branch, lead by the Supreme Court, has the power to tell the Executive branch what it is doing is Constitutional or Unconstitutional as part of the checks and balances. Yes, the Judicial branch without the power of the purse or control of the military has less powers to enforce judicial orders, but a big part of our Constitutional democracy is a reliance on good actors and the people having the ultimate power to vote out bad actors.

Trump could ignore the court orders, and continue to do things that the SCOTUS has ruled unconstitutional. There is little anyone can do to stop him. But doing so, he would not be a good actor acting as a President in a Constitutional democracy. He'd be following the path of many Fascist dictators before him who ignored the courts against him.

 

And what should happen if the SCOTUS ruled Presidential action to be unconstitutional, orders the President to at least try and facilitate the return of the guy, and in response, the POTUS thumbs his nose at the Supreme Court? Should this be acceptable? Or, should we call out the President for acting like a Fascist dictator ignoring Supreme Court orders?

 

None of that meant anything.

But it's weird that you continue to use the words "depot" and "deportation." Obviously that is not what's happening. What's happening is people are being sent to prison, quite often without a trial or proof of guilt.

Don't you think it's un-American and unconstitutional to lock people up without a trial?

 

If they came here illegally, then I feel ZERO remorse and do not find it in anyway UnConstitutional

 

Abrego Garcia was underage when he arrived. That's a civil offense, not criminal. He also had an order from a judge to stay in the country LEGALLY. He may have been undocumented at the time he was abducted by ICE and transported to El Salvador, but he was here legally when that happened. It's why all courts, including the SCOTUS, has ruled his deportation was Unconstitutional, and why the courts have ordered Trump to facilitate AG's return.

So I'll ask again. Why is OK for a President to ignore SCOTUS rulings?

 

actually if I read it correctly what the order said was he could be deported just no to El Salvador because he told the Court he would be killed by a rival gang if he got sent b ack to El Salvador

 

So you believe that all of the approximately 12-14 million people here without legal status need to be sent to a foreign prison?

Or just the ones who "came here illegally" ?

So, like ...... ones that came on a legal visa ..... but then didn't honor its terms, such as in overstaying their visa, should be sent to a foreign prison or not?

What about people who came here legally, but then illegally worked? Do they get sent to a foreign prison without a trial also?

 

I didn't mean to upset the status quo and the powers in the 3 supposedly equal branches of our federal government, I just think the POTUS has far more power to keep us safe than he seems to be establishing with concern to the district courts. And... he might not need to sound like Andrew Jackson when talking about the SCOTUS usurping his authority at every turn, but he should have his side of the equation understood more clearly.

 

The order also required another hearing before Abrego Garcia could be sent anywhere. Again, it's why all lower courts and the Supreme Court have said his deportation was Unconstitutional. And why they have all, including the SCOTUS, have ordered the Trump administration to facilitate his return. So AG's Constitutional protections can be followed.

So I ask again. Why is it OK for a POTUS to ignore SCOTUS rulings?

 

I do not know if they did or did not- I think the truth is somewhere in the middle

 

From the SCOTUS ruling:

Nevertheless, I agree with the Court’s order that the proper remedy is to provide Abrego Garcia with all the process to which he would have been entitled had he not been unlawfully removed to El Salvador. That means the Government must comply with its obligation to provide Abrego Garcia with “due process of law,” including notice and an opportunity to be heard, in any future proceedings. Reno v. Flores, 507 U. S. 292, 306 (1993). It must also comply with its obligations under the Convention Against Torture. See Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dec. 10, 1984, S. Treaty Doc. No. 100–20, 1465 U. N. T. S. 113. Federal law governing detention and removal of immigrants continues, of course, to be binding as well. See 8 U. S. C. §1226(a) (requiring a warrant before a noncitizen “may be arrested and detained pending a decision” on removal); 8 CFR §287.8(c)(2)(ii) (2024) (requiring same); see also 8 CFR §241.4(l) (in order to revoke conditional release, the Government must provide adequate notice and “promptly” arrange an “initial informal interview . . . to afford the alien an opportunity to respond to the reasons for the revocation stated in the notification”). Moreover, it has been the Government’s own well-established policy to “facilitate [an] alien’s return to the United States if . . . the alien’s presence is necessary for continued administrative removal proceedings” in cases where a noncitizen has been removed pending immigration proceedings. See U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Directive 11061.1, Facilitating the Return to the United States of Certain Lawfully Removed Aliens, §2 (Feb. 24, 2012). In the proceedings on remand, the District Court should continue to ensure that the Government lives up to its obligations to follow the law. [emphasis added]
​

The SCOTUS ruled his deportation to El Salvador was unconstitutional. The SCOTUS also ruled AG is entitled to due process, including an opportunity to present a defense in future proceedings. Last, the SCOTUS agreed the Trump admin must facilitate AG's return.

What has Trump done since the SCOTUS ruling? Try AG in the court of public opinion and openly disregard the SCOTUS ruling. Again, I ask, why is this acceptable?

 

What order required another hearing before he was sent anywhere? Certainly wasn't the SCOTUS ruling since that happened after he was already deported.

 

The 2019 judge ruling from Abrego Garcia's initial immigration hearing gave AG protections from deportation. Specifically, the ruling stated he couldn't be deported back to El Salvador. And in order for the protection order to be lifted and AG deported to a different country, AG should have the right to defend himself against any and all new allegations. You know, due process.

Read the link SCOTUS ruling. They agreed with lower courts that ICE deporting AG without due process was unconstitutional. And even the Trump admin admitted it was in error. It's why all courts, including the SCOTUS, has ordered the Trump admin to facilitate AG's immediate return.

The SCOTUS ruling upheld the 2019 judge ruling of protection from deportation. 2019 was five years ago.

 

There’s that facilitate word again

 

Dictionary.com uses the definition: make (an action or process) easy or easier

What has Trump done to facilitate AG's release? Anything? Not as I see it. All Trump has done is try AG in the court of public of opinion, which would be the opposite of facilitating his release.

So again, I'll ask, why is it OK for Trump to ignore SCOTUS orders?

 

he said he'd make a plane available to fly him back. That falls under 'facilitate'. Now obviously folks want more done and if more were done that would also fall under facilitate but the extent of facilitating the return of the wife beater was not specified in the USCC ruling.

 

Trump never provided a plane for AG. He said he would provide a plane if El Salvador released AG. The question is, what is Trump doing to facilitate AG's release? That answer is nothing. And if AG is never released, how is that Trump facilitating AG's return to the US?

A rhetorical question for the courts to decide. And considering Trump could ask for AG's release and withhold any additional funding until AG is released, it's not like there aren't actions Trump can do. And to date, he hasn't done squat.

 

which country should they have sent him to instead of El Salvador?