Trump administration concedes Maryland father from El Salvador was mistakenly deported

The question is who decides. Let’s say that the next president decides without a trial that you, Rick, are an alt right terrorist and need to be shipped to Guantanamo. Would you say that the courts should have no power to stop the president from doing this?

 

Cool.. is he going to hold himself and Hegseth to the same standard and check themselves into the El Salvador prison?

 

Beats me. I don’t have any insider information

 

was he convicted of being here illegally? No. So now that we agree that he hasn't been convicted of a crime, lets agree on the defintion of a criminal. That would be someone convicted of a crime. like Donald J Trump.

now repeat after me. Donald J Trump is a convicted criminal, Mr. Garcia is not.

say it enough, maybe you'll understand, maybe not, but those are the facts.

 

From a supporter of the wife beater currently residing in the White House.

In the interest of accuracy I would mention that Ivana later retracted her allegations against Donald adding that she did so after entering into a divorce settlement that included an NDA.

I would also add that while Abrego Garcia did enter the US illegally, in 2019 a judge issued an order specifically forbidding his deportation to El Salvador almost certainly because there was credible evidence that his life would be in danger if he were deported back to his home country.

 

That's the dissenting opinion. Again, the SCOTUS ruled 7-2 that the Alien Enemies Act has judicial review, and that Trump was not using the act Constitutionally to deport persons without due process. Because we aren't at war with anyone. No formal declaration, and nothing informal where foreign soldiers are looking to invade and plant the flag of a foreign country on American soil.

Abrego Garcia also came here illegally, but he was a minor at the time (16). Those under 18 do not accrue unlawful presence in the US. They cannot be charged with a crime until they are 18. Doesn't stop minor immigrants from being potentially deported.

Abrego Garcia was picked up as an adult in 2019 and had a full immigration hearing. While he was charged as a gang member, the judge found the evidence not to be credible. In fact, the judge found that there was a credible threat on his life if he were to be returned to El Salvador, and granted AG protection from deportation if he stayed in the US, stayed out of trouble, and regularly checked in with immigration.

AG lived up to his end of the bargain to stay. No criminal record and regular check ins. It's why the Judges, including the SCOTUS, has ruled his deportation was unconstitutional. Judges, including the SCOTUS ruling 9-0, have also ruled the Trump admin needs to act to get AG's return. The Trump admin has ignored this SCOTUS ruling, unless you argue trying AG in the court of public opinion is working to get AG returned to Maryland.

So the question again is, what power does the POTUS have to ignore SCOTUS rulings? The President doesn't have the power to interpret the law. The Constitution clearly states that's the Court's power, and ever since Marbury V Madison, we've had Judicial Review as accepted precedent. So either you follow the Constitution, and Trump must facilitate AG's return. Or, you are supporting a Fascist dictator who like Putin and Hitler before him, ignored court rulings. Next step in forming the Fascist state? Dissolution of current courts and installation of a kangaroo court system that rubber stamps all of Trump's decisions.

 

The "unflattering dossier" was most likely the 2019 report from the Prince Georges County police department that had been previously released. I would also add that it was authorized by a police officer who was later terminated for misconduct in an unrelated case. Maybe it also included a reference to his wife's request for a protective order which she later explained and/or the time he stopped in Tennessee with the suggestion that he may be involved in human trafficking an allegation which never resulted in a charge.

 

Let's be fair about this. Our country was illegally invaded for nearly four years and the SCOTUS nor did any American federal judges forced our federal immigration laws be obeyed.

Where was the American citizens' DUE PROCESS in that ILLEGAL invasion? Where were these judges? Why are they not protecting us... using laws that are already on the books?

Where are our protections?

These judges now say these illegal invaders deserve "due process" for illegally breaking into our country and endangering the American citizenry?

The protection of our American people... woman and children, lies with the POTUS and he and his Executive Privilege written into the Constitution of the United States of American give him broad powers to protect all of us from enemies of the state... foreign and DOMESTIC.

The SCOTUS is acting against We The People and acting as comfort and they re actively aiding to the enemy of the state. The SCOTUS is trading on thin ice, and they are interfering with The Executive Branch's Constitutional powers to take foreign invaders out of our counrty.

 

It is like a legal mad lib.

 

IF VAg8r1 and AzCatFan were on Australian TV

 

The invasion was so bad under Biden! Uniformed soldiers in every street corner. Nightly bomb raid sirens going off. Weeks spent in bomb shelters!

Oh wait, none of that happened. In fact, immigration rates were similar to what we saw in the 1980s and again early 2000s. And crime rates? Ticked up a bit Biden's first two years, but then fell to historic lows.

 

I appreciate your passion, Rick. I would say that these battles of power must be resolved via our laws and cannot be adjudicated via any other means.

So if the constitution says that on issues of immigration the president can overrule the Supreme Court, then so be it. But this language is not in the constitution, and therefore I think it’s a very dangerous path to just introduce it with our actions. Again, any door that Trump opens, president Newsome will be more than happy to walk through.

 

there is nothing in our Constitution that gives any of our branches of government power over the other- but it does gives a system of checks and balances, but does not give any of the 3 the power to say you cannot do this or that to the other branch so the SCOTUS can tell the Executive branch they have to do something but they cannot force them to do so and SCOTUS has zero power to force another Country to do anything - so I guess it depends upon whether you favor the illegals being allowed to stay in this country or not as to which branch'es decision you want to favor - the left and this includes the legacy media all want Trump to fail so they are going to scream at the top of their lungs his deportation stance is illegal

 

That absolutely is the check and balance. What do you think the Supreme Court’s job is? It’s to strike down unconstitutional laws passed by congress or rule when an administration is not following the laws of the land. What you are saying it “has no right to do” is the very essence of its existence. Of course the entire system relies on good faith actors. The amazing thing here is there are Supremes that don’t act in good faith, the court is 6-3 conservative and at least two conservative justices are so far out there they are seen by many as “bad faith” actors. Somehow that is *still* not good enough, so the bad faith White House claims they don’t have to listen to the courts.

This is not a legitimate argument under the rule of law. If an admin just ignores the rulings of the courts, that isn’t “checks and balances”, it’s called lawlessness.

 

There is not single period in this entire word salad.

What are checks and balances if they don't allow one branch to limit the other? What an incredibly contradictory sentence (or whatever this is).

 

scotus can limit the power of the executive branch by saying a decision is unconstituitional- they cannot however, force the executive branch to do anything outside of that scope- so they can say Trump's deportation EO is unconstitutional and not allow him to continue but they cannot make him bring the guy back, nor can they force another country to send the guy back