The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Trump Takes Dangerous Steps Towards Defying Court Orders in Garcia Abrego Case
The Supreme Court ruled they administration must "facilitate" the return of an illegally deported migrant imprisoned in El Salvador at its behest. They have responded by doing virtually nothing to comply.

When the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump Administration must "facilitate" the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant illegally deported to imprisonment in El Salvador, I noted it was an important victory for immigrant rights, but also warned the administration might try to weasel its way out of compliance by applying a very narrow definition of "facilitate" that licenses near-total inaction. Sadly, this is exactly what happened.
When the case was remanded back to the district court, Judge Paula Xinis issued an order instructing the defendants to "take all available steps to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia to the United States as soon as possible." The government indefensibly interpreted this as merely requiring it to remove "domestic" obstacles to his return, making no effort to get the Salvadoran government to release him from prison. That makes no sense in a context where the Salvadorans had imprisoned Abrego Garcia at the behest of the US, and the Trump Administration could easily secure his release simply by demanding it. As conservative legal commentator Ed Whelan puts it: "The administration is clearly acting in bad faith… The Supreme Court and the district court have properly given it the freedom to select the means by which it will undertake to ensure Abrego Garcia's return. The administration is abusing that freedom by doing basically nothing."
The Administration coupled this bad-faith failure to follow the Supreme Court's and district court's orders with unsubstantiated claims that Abrego Garcia was a member of the MS 13 drug gang. They have no evidence for that. And if they did, the proper course of action is to charge him with it in court, rather than deportation and imprisonment without due process.
Judge Xinis appears to agree with Whelan's assessment. In an order issued today, she chastizes the the Administration for doing "nothing" to bring Abrego Garcia back to the US and rejects the assumption they need only remove "domestic" impediments:
Defendants… remain obligated, at a minimum, to take the steps available to them toward aiding, assisting, or making easier Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and resuming his status quo ante. But the record reflects that Defendants have done nothing at all. Instead, the Defendants obliquely suggest that "facilitate" is limited to "taking all available steps to remove any domestic obstacles that would otherwise impede the alien's ability to return here…." The fallacy in the Defendants' argument is twofold. First, in the "immigration context,….." facilitating return of those wrongly deported can and has included more extensive governmental efforts, endorsed in prior precedent and DHS publications. Thus, the Court cannot credit that "facilitating" the ordered relief is as limited as Defendants suggest.
Second, and more fundamentally, Defendants appear to have done nothing to aid in Abrego Garcia's release from custody and return to the United States to "ensure that his case is handled as it would have been" but for Defendants' wrongful expulsion of him. Abrego Garcia, 604 U.S.— , slip op. at 2 [citing Supr. Thus, Defendants' attempt to skirt this issue by redefining "facilitate" runs contrary to law and logic.
Judge Xinis goes on to order extensive expedited discovery regarding the defendants' conduct, to determine more fully what the the government has done and could do to facilitate Abrego Garcia's release. We shall see whether the defendants' compliance is as flawed as it has been with previous judicial orders. If they have not yet quite openly refused to follow judicial orders, they certainly have been trying to circumvent them in bad faith.
I think Judge Xinis should have ordered still stronger measures against the defendants, such as requiring them to formally demand Abrego Garcia's release from Salvadoran custody under threat of termination of the agreement under which the Salvadoran regime imprisons US deportees for money. The entire arrangement is an unconstitutional violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment (the deportees are imprisoned without ever having any opportunity to defend themselves in court). Maintaining it is therefore not a legitimate foreign policy interest within the prerogrative of the executive branch.
Much is at stake in this case. If the Administration is able to get away with circumventing or defying court orders, it would severely undermine all constitutional constraints on government power, including those that protect US citizens. And as prominent conservative Judge Harvie Wilkinson noted in his opinion in the Fourth Circuit ruling in this case, it is extremely dangerous if the government can deport people to imprisonment in a foreign state without any due process or any meaningful obligation to return them:
The facts of this case thus present the potential for a disturbing loophole: namely that the government could whisk individuals to foreign prisons in violation of court orders and then contend, invoking its Article II powers, that it is no longer their custodian, and there is nothing that can be done. It takes no small amount of imagination to understand that this is a path of perfect lawlessness, one that courts cannot condone.
I would add that this danger isn't limited to recent immigrants. It applies to US citizens, as well. The threat to US citizens' rights is no longer just theoretical, since the president is openly considering the possibility of deporting and imprisoning US citizens in El Salvador.
This slippery slope must be stopped before we go any further down it. Courts must do their part. And the rest of us must give them strong political support in doing so. That can help deter the administration from further rampant illegality.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Save your breath, Somin. These people are so far down the rabbit hole with hate and fear, laws mean nothing
The Court said facilitate and Trump is ready to facilitate the return of the illegal alien suspected gangbanger who shouldn't be here in the first place, with the term facilitate being adhered to in a commonly accepted sense of the word. Nowhere in the order do they say Trump has to use Mr. Somins personal definition of facilitate for this case.
Its now up to Bukale not Trump and I suspect he would prefer not to ship back one of his own citizens. So the US would have to spend significant political capital and possibly cause a major diplomatic row to get this one person back costing resources that would be obviously ridiculous in any other case of a nation trying to claw back any other noncitizen, short of a major criminal let alone someone who shouldn't have been here.
The Dems and Mr Somin are always whining about Trump stomping around and pissing off allies and suddenly they want to piss off another?
Or yours either.
"facilitate" is not an exacting term.
Trump is free to use my definition or spend significant political capital and go against his goals to use Mr Somins with the probable result being that the opposition instead of being grateful will just use the opportunity to taunt him for caving. Want to bet on which one he will go for?
Of course Trump is trying to use your definition (duh). But, he won't be free to do so if SCOTUS says otherwise.
If SCOTUS wishes to violate the Logan Act and engage in foreign diplomacy on their own, there could be issues.
Courts have drastically overstepped their power. They need to be cut back. A lot.
The Supreme Court said that the district court’s order “properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador”.
What do yin think the government has done that discharges that obligation?
What obligation? Is there anything the government can do to discharge the obligation, that falls within the court's power to order the government to do? Who is supposed to decide whether a particular course of action is within the judge's power? Trump?
I mean, Pam Bondi has said that the US would send a plane to pick the guy up if there were the opportunity. That make his release easier. Does that discharge the obligation?
Well, the Supreme Court said it was proper to order the government to facilitate his release, so that suggests that the government should do something. The Supreme Court also said they should explain what they’ve done, and they haven’t.
How about asking Bukale to let him out, so we can put him on that plane? There is no excuse, legal or moral, not to make that request, when we're the ones who shipped him off, tried and convicted by no one, for a life sentence in a third world gulag. If you're as satisfied as Trump is to just let him rot, you're as grotesque and loathsome as Trump is.
The moral reason is that the illegal snuck in and has no right to be here in the first place. His supposed innocence of gangbanging does not grant him a free lifetime pass to the US. The US owed him nothing before he snuck him and it owes him nothing after he was caught in 2019 and pulled that protection order unless you believe rulebreakers should be treated preferentially to lawabiding.
The gangs he was 'afraid' of have been decimated under bukale, he was not given any protection order against the lawful government of his country. So back he should go.
If his army of admirers want to hash out the question of his guilt or innocence they should do it over there where he belongs. It might go alot better than wasting all these resources turning it into an political question bukale will be compelled to oppose.
WGAF? Trump commits much more serious crimes every day of the week and twice on Sunday, and it doesn't phase you in the least. You don't care about the law.
omg, you're so right!
OPEN BORDERS FOR EVERYONE!!!! I'm just like Ilya now! Because Trump commits more serious laws than these pure, innocent victims! OPEN BORDERS FOR EVERYONE!!!
In fact, let everyone out of jail whose committed less serious laws than what President Trump commits LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE DAY!!!!!
Great comment. David Notimportant.
What all of this boils down to is that from 1924-1965, the border was basically closed. In 1965, America was mostly white, about 10% black, and a sprinkling of others. Americans were largely happy with it that way.
Nobody asked for tens of millions of non-white peasants from alien cultures to be imported, and after years of expressing displeasure, the people were lied to. I'm thinking of the mid 80s Reagan signed law that didn't uphold the bargain to get the border under control.
Now, we have a president who is finally removing large numbers of non-white peasants who don't belong here.
That's why so many Americans don't care about Abrego. He had a menial job and was raising a special needs child. He is objectively a bad addition to America, whether or not he's been convicted of any violent crime.
I could not care less about color or race. For me it's the alien culture aspect. Anyone can be American so long as the are willing and able to assimilate into the dominant culture. For that to occur people have to be admitted at a rate where the system and culture aren't completely overwhelmed. My grandfather from Tuscany, and my ex from Moscow had so thoroughly incorporated themselves in the US way of things both considered their birth lands foreign countries. My wife, who was born in London and spent her childhood in the UK goes on rants about how "crazy" they are over there.
I don't care if you come from the Amazon jungle or the Kalahari Desert or the Mekong Delta, assuming you entered legally, learned the language, are gainfully and legally employed, I'll be just as happy and honored to join you at the backyard BBQ and share a beer as the Poles down the street or the Germans next door.
You want to sneak in illegally, hide somewhere along with all the other illegals, engage in crime, and refuse to assimilate and damage the community, I don't really care what means it takes to remove you from the country or where you are sent back to.
No. This has been yet another episode of Simple Answers to Stupid Questions.
We have indicated we will take him back of Bukale decides to release him. Ie we are facilitating a release in a similar way that a tunnel facilitates a car potentially moving through it. What more do you want us to do? Start a war against El Salvador flinging nukes and marching armies down to snatch one illegal suspected gangbanger back from his own home country?
To be clear, it’s your position that sending a plane to fly him back should he be released is facilitating his release?
Unless Trump says he doesn’t have to do that, in which case flying a plane there was NEVER part of “facilitation”. They’ll have to wait to get their next orders.
"To be clear, it’s your position that sending a plane to fly him back should he be released is facilitating his release?"
Given the person in question is a CITIZEN of ES held in ES --- yes, that is the full extent of the doable.
Again, courts can send their interns on a daring flight into ES to remove him themselves, but that will go poorly.
"What do yin think the government has done that discharges that obligation?"
They have a plan ready to pick him up if ES decides to release him. Bukele said he will not release his criminal citizen. Ergo, Trump abided by the asinine order.
Courts are beclowning themselves. They will gravely miss having credibility.
I don't understand the point of posts like this. It's bad faith and you don't believe a word of it. How can you be so chickenshit — even though not posting under your real name — to not just use the racial epithets that you clearly want to about Hispanic people, so much so that you'll invent imaginary scenarios that you don't even pretend to actually believe.
It would not cause any diplomatic row, would cost no imaginary political capital, would take no resources of any sort. You know that is utter bullshit in literally every respect.
Woah, guys, DN is on to something. The ONLY POSSIBLE REASON to not expect Trump to carry out this judge's foreign policy preferences is because YOU ARE RACIST!!!!
If President Trump doesn't personally invade El Salvador RIGHT NOW leading Seal Team Six (what's left after Obama had them decimated), then he is DEFYING SCOTUS to it's FACE!
They said "facilitate" and that means doing literally everything possible, domestic AND FOREIGN, up to and including personally invading El Salvador!
Yes, actually, though that's not what I actually wrote. What I actually wrote is that the only possible reason to pretend that Trump couldn't get the guy back with one phone call is because you are racist.
Nah, you were pretty clear. They nailed you dead to rights.
"How can you be so chickenshit — even though not posting under your real name — to not just use the racial epithets that you clearly want to about Hispanic people"
Your quote, son, in case you forgot or wish to ignore it.
This insane overreaction by legal professionals is quite entertaining, however embarrassing it is. The silly district court order was to “ facilitate and effectuate.” The SCt. order said, in effect, don’t really know what you’re saying so clarify with due respect for executive authority in foreign policy. They could have been (and should have in light of the lower court’s derangement) clearer and more forceful, but they certainly didn’t order the president to do anything. In fact, they ordered the district judge to get his head out of his ass.
Good. We are not ruled by the courts. We don't vote for them, and they are not special people. Millions more need to be deported, as soon as possible. We've let judges act as politicians for far too long - time to rein them in.
You know, we are literally a handful of months from when Biden was who the American people had voted for, you think he should have swept aside those pesky courts?
The people voted for Biden allegedly --- but he was certainly not the person in charge for most, if ANY, of "his" administration.
Why? Why do any "need" to be deported?
Because our cities are too crowded, traffic sucks, and we have a $2.5 trillion deficit every year as far as the eye can see.
All it would take is a phone call from Trump to Bukele and he won't do it.
Are you saying the court can order Trump to call Bukele? If not, then your statement is irrelevant.
The Court can order Trump to bring him back. Trump can easily do that. Any American President has immense leverage over the President of El Salvador.
So you are saying that the judicial branch runs the executive branch?
“ The Court can order Trump to bring him back.”
You mean, to effectuate his release? It already tried that.
The DC already tried that. Got shot down at the SC. So, no.
Saying something like that the court’s “order properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador” seems like a strange way to shoot it down.
And saying that the DC has to clarify its order because it might exceed the courts power is a strange way to uphold it.
I'm just going to create a macro so I don't have to keep retyping it: which part of "the rest of the District Court’s order [i.e., other than the already passed deadline] remains in effect" confuses you?
it is, because the original order did say effectuate and it order the government to bring him back and it was shot down. Further in the hearing, the Judge acknowledged that she doesn't not have the power to order the government to bring him back. which is why i don't understand why people keep saying they lost. they clearly won, the first order the court wrote required the government to facilitate and effectuate the guy back and even gave a deadline. The adopted Judge Wilkerson opinion which is that the Court cannot command the executive branch to do foreign affairs.
There was no shooting down. I did create a macro: which part of "the rest of the District Court’s order [i.e., other than the already passed deadline] remains in effect" confuses you?
They, of course, did not.
Why would Bukele extradite one of hisnown citizens from his home country? A gang member at that?
Is Trump supposed to order the DoJ to forge evidence to try to extradite Garcia?
Of course, we all know hios opponents have no problem with forging evidence...
Nonsensical comment.
Non-responsive.
For a chance to spend a weekend at Mar-a-Lago with Trump?
Why are you misusing the word "extradite," when the correct word is "release"?
Why wouldn't that be more of a reason to let him leave the country, if it weren't utter bullshit, which it is?
Why would the US accept a non-citizen gang banger into its country?
You are aware if EVERYTHING you want to happen happens --- he is STILL never setting foot in the USA.
Never. Going. To. Happen.
How do you know they haven't already discussed it?
You know an awful lot for someone who doesn't know squat and thinks NASA does a better job than SpaceX.
"All it would take is a phone call from Trump to Bukele and he won't do it."
Was unaware courts have ANY control over foreign policy. Where were they granted it to insist on the President negotiate with foreign powers?
...to send a non-American citizen back to the US, where he cannot enter regardless.
I suspect you are underestimating Bondi's willingness to tell the lower federal courts to go stuff it.
My expectation is, that unless a direct and explicit order comes from the Supreme Court itself, the Trump administration will consider orders from lower courts to be no more than 'sugestions' that it may, or more likely will not follow.
That appears to be the legal strategy: "we don't have to follow any orders from the lower courts, only the supreme court's orders have any status. And we'll ignore lower court rulings while we drag out the appeal for as long as possible allowing us to implement whatever we want in the meantime. And if SCOTUS tells us no? Well, we'll see if we obey them at that time."
Of course, there's no legal basis for ignoring lower court rulings, but they are making that argument anyway.
There's even LESS legal basis for national injunctions, but hey, that is where we are.
I think ilya is incorrect and that the judge's order is going to vacated.
all the examples the judge gave for facilitation would be a violation of separation of powers if the court had ordered the government to take those actions. and in actually they are all closer to effectuation which SCOTUS pretty told her were beyond the power of the court.
it would be beyond the court's powers to order the executive to ask for him back. I don't know what the court expects them to do voluntarily that which she can't order them to do.
Further if El Salvador accepts that he is a MS-13 member they have the right to hold on him regardless of what the contract says because he is a citizen of El Salvador, and that alone is sufficient basis in El Salvador for the government to detain you.
But did WE prove he was a gang member? How can El Salvador conduct their own investigation on our soil?
What is there to prove? if the government of El Salvador believes he was a gang member, there is nothing else to discuss. Our rules of evidence don't apply to them obviously.
In his original hearing he admits to being a gang member in El Salvador, however his mother said he was forced to join.
Even if true I don't think El Salvador particularly cares if your membership in the gang was voluntary.
This is yet another lie from the fuck-hispanics crowd. He never "admitted" any such thing, and his mother never said any such thing.
"But did WE prove he was a gang member? How can El Salvador conduct their own investigation on our soil?"
Proven in court hearing and upheld by an appeals court.
So, yes.
"I think ilya is incorrect and that the judge's order is going to vacated."
Which orders that are immediately appealable as of right has Judg Xinis issued? Exactly one -- the April 4, 2025 order on the Plaintiffs' March 25 renewed order for temporary restraining order, which the District Court construed as a motion for preliminary injunction. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815.21.0_4.pdf
A unanimous SCOTUS upheld that order in substantial part and remanded the matter to the District Court for further proceedings. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a949_lkhn.pdf
the judge issued a new order today. ordering expedited discovery. however, her examples of facilitate, seem to be to be inappropriate, as they were examples of things beyond the courts power to order and seem to me to be effectuate, in fact one of the cases actually used the word effectuate rather than facilitate. I expect the government to appeal, and I think the court will vacate. probably 5-4 or 6-3.
It's a longshot to get an appeal for a discovery order prior to final judgment.
usually yes, however the DOJ attorney was very good, and had ask the judge to define Facilitate in the order, and at first the judge did push back, but in the end, the judge did define it in the new order.
It's too broad, and in this case, I think it is appealable, because I don't think the government could ever meet the threshold without actually bringing him back, which the district court specially can't order the government to do. and the discovery is because she said they didn't facilitate.
It's just discovery. The government will not be bringing him back during discovery. The government can appeal whether her definition of "facilitate" is constitutionally permissible after discovery and a final judgment.
"It's too broad, and in this case, I think it is appealable, because I don't think the government could ever meet the threshold without actually bringing him back, which the district court specially can't order the government to do. and the discovery is because she said they didn't facilitate."
This order would be appealable prior to final judgment based on what federal statute, ikaritenshi?
Still waiting, ikaritenshi. This order would be appealable prior to final judgment based on what federal statute?
Hey did you inform him of your expectations and requirements for when he attends to this board?
I was grateful when you told me my posting rules and schedules.
Xinis also has exactly zero ability to demand "discovery" about negotiations with foreign nations.
Trump should just send completely redacted pieces of paper, with the byline "We removed the parts the courts have zero right to see in the first place"
Meanwhile, counterpoint from Josh: love that Cheeto dick, don't actually understand law
Verdict: Josh wins!
During the 1930s and 1940s Hitler took some “steps towards” facilitating Jews departing.
I mean, it’s not like Hitler didn’t play similar sorts of games with the Red Cross and other officials. I mean, once they’ve been deported out of the country, it’s like, not our problem anymore. Nothing we can do. So bad, so sad.
Trump gets pressured to show what conditions are like? Maybe they’ll get to see a Theresenstadt-like show prison.
All you have to do is slap a star of david on the Palestinians left alive, load them into box cars, and ship them to the nearest ghetto.
It's kinda amazing...the people claiming to be victims are fire bombing synagogues and jewish governors etc. Next they'll be claiming libs are actually doing it
Well he is a registered Socialist. Just saying...
The only relevant question is was Garcia in the county illegally? Since he was I am not particularly concerned that he was removed, nor is it my concern what happened to him afterward. Don't want to end up in Hell? Don't enter the country illegally no atter what your sob story from back home is.. Hopefully he will serve as a warning and example to others. Allowing illegals to remain is a slap in the face to everyone who entered the legal and proper way
Your comment is an example of why the hysteria of this case is so stupid.
The public isn't going to view this as the existential threat to democracy requiring a revolt to overthrow the government.
And let's speculate would happen if he is returned.
He would receive a new hearing where he would again be declared an illegal alien and receive a deportation order. The question then would be where to deport him to and it's possible that place might be El Salvador despite the previous asylum claim since his claim was that he feared a rival gang and the Bukele administration has locked up all the gangs to a point that they are no longer a threat. In other words the facts have changed and his asylum claim is no longer valid.
That is not, in fact, the relevant question, let alone the only one.
No, it really is.
In fact, we would not permit a plane to LAND in the US if he was on it.
The whole not required to allow a non-citizen criminal into the country. Courts are remarkably powerless to impact foreign policy. They are going to learn that lesson.
Bukele could demand $1 trillion to send Maryland Man back to the United States and Ilya would write a post demanding we pay it.
A million is chump change, probably a lot less than thy’re going to have to pay in legal fees. If it were a billion dollars it would still be the duty of any federal judge to throw in jail whoever needs to be thrown in jail until it is paid. Don’t like it? Don’t elect people who stupidly throw your money away by placing themselves in the thrall of tinpot dictators and allowing them to stick them, your country, and your tax dollars up for ransom.
Kleppe wrote $1 Trillion. With a "T"
ReaderY wrote: "If it were a billion dollars it would still be the duty of any federal judge to throw in jail whoever needs to be thrown in jail until it is paid."
Thank you for your refreshingly honest reply. To be clear, you are a crazy person; but I admire your willingness to wear it on your sleeve.
I'm with ReaderY.
If we have to spend $1B so be it. Let the Republicans explain why this stupid waste of money was necessary.
Start a GoFundMe. You can be the first contributor. Want to donate to a gangbanger, use your own money.
Whether he's a gangbanger is in dispute. What we do know is that he's been tried and convicted of nothing. If you don't care that we sent somebody who's been convicted of no crime to a concentration camp for life, and you don't think we should make a sincere and concerted effort to correct that wrong, you're contemptible.
No, it's not. Found to be one in court and upheld on appeal.
At this point Trump’s lawyers are effectively lion tamers, there to throw things at the lions in order to keep them at bay. These lions, being cats of a sort, suffer from the feline infirmity of curiosity; throw papers with words at them, and they will pick them up and puzzle over them for a considerable time. If that fails, one can throw more papers with more words.
After all, they know these lions are caged. They can’t really do anything. It’s all just a show It suits the keepers’ purposes to continue the lions’ delusion that they even have any agency at all, let alone any pretense of mastery in the matter. The keepers know perfectly well who the real boss is; it simply suits their purposes to keep the lions, and the gullible public, deluded as long as possible. The keepers can end the show at any time. All they have to do is leave, shut the cage door, lock it, and stop paying any attention to the lions’ attempts to growl orders. Or, for that matter, their whimpers begging to be let out.
This is an extremely dangerous separation of powers doctrine that Ilya appears to be proposing. In short, does he actually believe a district court judge can order...
1. The President of the United States to demand a foreign country release one of the foreign country's own civilians from incarceration?
What else can the district court judge do?
Can the district court judge order sanctions be made against the foreign country if it it doesn't agree? Can the district court judge order the US Military take direct action against the foreign country?
Ilya is correct here...much is at stake. But in the very much the wrong direction.
You sure gotta fall for some embarrassingly ridiculous pretexts to be as deep into Trump as Armchair is.
Maybe another hypothetical will help you deflect from leaning into being an utter rube.
You did not cite the single error there.
Garcia is NOT an American citizen. He IS a citizen of El Salvador. Ergo, it is Bukele's decision. He already publicly said no.
Has anyone raised the possibility that the deportation was not an error? That the regime deliberately deported someone they shouldn't have to test the limits of what they could get away with? Low probability, IMO, but not zero.
I think it more likely they knew it was illegal to deport him but didn't care.
I also think a court ordering the President to get a foreign country to deport one of their own citizens who is in prison for being a gang member, per their judiciary, is as silly as ordering a murderer to revive his victim's corpse. The only judicial remedy is prosecution for violating the court order that he was protected from deportation.
I have said exactly that, repeatedly. And I’d be very comfortable betting you a hundred dollars to your nickel it’s the case. The odds would still be considerably in my favor.
It’s a test case for an effective secret police and gulag system operating outside the reach of the courts. You disn’t hear Trump talk about asking for five more prisons to deport “homegrown criminals” now that he’s established a successful test case?
If he can can get away with this, with just a few more pushes he can dissappear Hillary Clinton, Liz Cheney, Chris krebs, or any other “criminal” he wants into one of those El Salvadoran concentration camps. He can make his enemies disappear by the thousands, possibly millions. He can make anyone he’s ever had a grudge against dissappear. And of course DOGE is using its access to government databases to compile lists of enemies to spirit out to prison or worse in El Salvador. What do you think DOGE has been sniffing through all those databases for?
I have! I think it's more likely that people in this administration just hate brown people and are rushing to do everything they can to get rid of as many as they can, as quickly as they can, and just screwed up… but it's certainly possible that it was intentional. What I think is undeniable is that this confrontation with the courts is 100% intentional. They could have gotten him back at any time with one phone call, and are deliberately refusing because they want to establish that there are no checks and balances on Trump.
Thank you for your report from Whitelandia.
Advocates to keep Abrego in CECOT invariably discount to zero considerations of due process. Those cannot be allowed into the discussion, lest they invalidate detention arguments.
I expect SCOTUS will be troubled by that same dilemma. If it decides to approve Trump's conduct of the case, SCOTUS will be forced to overturn as unconstitutional at least part of the due process jurisprudence which stands athwart Trump's claim to unfettered power. A problem to think of a way to do that without endangering American citizens looks hard to solve. Prisoners will not present with lines pre-drawn, to separate the privileged citizens from the non-privileged others.
You think they will be "troubled"? I very much doubt that.
"Troubled," in this instance was not so much meant to imply questions of conscience, but instead unavoidably awkward and dangerous practicalities. I do not think any conceivable Court decision which leaves Trump free to act at pleasure against immigrants can do anything but deliver culpable catastrophe to the Court.
He is a citizen of El Salvador.
It is filed, DEEPLY, under "not our problem"
Just because Somin thinks something is bad doesn't mean it's good.
The executive branch (DoJ) decided in 2019 that sending this guy back to El Salvador would be illegal. Sending him back wouldn't just violate some random law (which would of course be bad), it would violate laws which Congress adopted to harmonize U. S. law with U. S. treaty obligations. Specifically, the DoJ said Garcia faced return ("refoulement") to a country where he'd be persecuted. By gangs.
For El Salvador to release Garcia might be seen as wounding to national pride, since it could be interpreted as agreeing with the 2019 DoJ ruling affirming the danger of persecution for Garcia in El Salvador.
"OK, we'll send him back, we don't want him, our gangs would just persecute him anyway."
Doesn't sound like something a proud country would say of itself.
Could a court stop the U. S. treasury from reimbursing El Salvador under the prison deal until Garcia gets released?
That sounds like a better route than judicially monitoring U. S. diplomacy.
One of the constitutional law geniuses will explain the problem of standing. A country that depends heavily on lawyers will inevitably become monstrous. They may have different, um, interpretations, but they play on the same team. An oligarchy you can evade but a lawyergarchy you cannot.
Why not just prosecute whatever individual ordered the illegal deportation, same as they would prosecute a murderer or kidnapper?
If someone had kidnapped the guy and taken him to El Salvador for reward money, the only remedy is prosecuting him for kidnapping. I can't imagine any court ordering the kidnapper to go kidnap him back.
Qualified immunity, in all its glory.
Of course no government employee ever wants to eliminate that. Just like scaling back Trump's powers but not the President's.
There is no qualified immunity to criminal prosecution.
Um, Trump's immune from prosecution according to SCOTUS. And in any case who's going to prosecute? Pam Bondi is going to prosecute other administration officials for doing what Trump wants? Even if she wanted to, which of course is absurd, Trump can just pardon them.
Welcome to Lawfare 2025. Same as Lawfare 2016-2024, only different. You didn't care then. Your concern now is noted. Next!
The facts on the ground have changed, rendering the initial order against being deported back to El Salvador, moot.
El Salvador now has a lower murder and crime rate than Maryland where Mr. Garcia wants to return to. He is literally safer in his own country.
Stipulated, but there's still that ruling which has to be changed, with accompanying due process.
"The facts on the ground have changed, rendering the initial order against being deported back to El Salvador, moot."
Why then, Kevin P, did the feds not ask the tribunal that issued the order to set it aside because of mootness?
Excuses, like, maybe, that the government of El Salvador won’t release Garcia, one of their citizens, for shipment back here?
I was asking about why the feds, prior to grabbing Abrego Garcia, did not ask the tribunal that issued the order to set it aside because of mootness?
KevinP, you are correct. The people cannot seem to wrap their little minds around the fact that Garcia was deemed to be an illegal MS-13 gang member by an immigration judge. That decision was upheld on appeal. The Barrio 18 gang that he claims he was in fear of if deported back to his home country has been taken out, for the most part by the El Salvadorian government. He had a deportation order with a witholding from being deported to El Savador. Based upon the AEA, that witholding became invalid. Would they be doing this much crying if he would have been deported to Samolia? I doubt it. Thay cannot even admit the facts. The SCOTUS ruled 9-0 in the governments favor. They cannot understand the words they read. Everyday, this leftist author post some silly argument on here. People are tired of hearing it.
KevinP, you are correct. The people cannot seem to wrap their little minds around the fact that Garcia was deemed to be an illegal MS-13 gang member by an immigration judge. That decision was upheld on appeal. The Barrio 18 gang that he claims he was in fear of if deported back to his home country has been taken out, for the most part by the El Salvadorian government. He had a deportation order with a witholding from being deported to El Savador. Based upon the AEA, that witholding became invalid. Would they be doing this much crying if he would have been deported to Samolia? I doubt it. They cannot even admit the facts. The SCOTUS ruled 9-0 in the governments favor. They cannot understand the words they read. Everyday, this leftist author post some silly argument on here. People are tired of hearing it.
Here are the real facts, unlike the claims in this article, from Garcia's Bond hearing before the immigration judge.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815.11.1_1.pdf
Here is the ruling on his appeal from the immigration judge's determination. Again, you can see here that this lunatic does not have clear facts. Instead, they choose the distort them from what the record reflects. This illegal MS-13 gang member received all the due process he is due. Good riddance!
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815.11.2.pdf
Which part of "the rest of the District Court’s order [i.e., other than the already passed deadline] remains in effect" confuses you?
That's not how it works, even if there were any reason to believe your facts.
"Could a court stop the U. S. treasury from reimbursing El Salvador under the prison deal until Garcia gets released?"
No.
Courts cannot dictate foreign policy. Much as they may wish they can.
"Facilitate" is a weasel word from justices who know perfectly well that Trump will look for excuses. They are complicit. The Federalist Society wolves have gained control of the herd.
No. They probably know that they don’t have the power to order the Executive Branch to “effectuate” the return of Garcia from his native El Salvador. At this point, with the government of that country refusing to send him back, “effectuate” would probably require either the Secretary of State to change this country’s foreign policy in regards to El Salvador, and/or the Secretary of Defense to intervene militarily. Which are core Executive Branch/Presidential powers. “Facilitate” steps back from that precipice.
This all seems backwards to me. If there was a crime committed by deporting him, then punish those responsible (via the AG, DOJ, or what have you). But the damage was done and now this particular individual is out of reach of the courts.
An illustrative example: Instead of deporting him, what if the administration had lined him up before a firing squad and executed him. Obviously the court could not order them to resurrect him and his life is outside of the courts powers. What could happen is the criminal prosecution of the individuals responsible.
Punishing the crime committed is what stops the burning of witches, not some judicial slippery slope after the fact.
Exactly. Same as with any crime, whether kidnapping or murder or assault. Even a burglary is punished by a fine or sentence, not an order to return the stolen goods and undo the ancillary damage.
I mean, that's wrong. Restitution is in fact a routine part of a sentence for a criminal.
Money restitution, or returning the goods and repairing the damage? There's a difference.
You also skipped the kidnapping and murder cases, so I'm going to guess you agree with them.
Qualified immunity, in all its glory.
Qualified immunity is not a defense to criminal prosecution.
...and who, EXACTLY, would prosecute?
Trump can just pull a Biden and pardon every single person involved in his admin in perpetuity, if he so wishes.
If they can make an oopsie with a Salvadoran, sending him where he specifically wasn't supposed to be sent, they can make an oopsie with a U. S. citizen, sending him to a prison abroad.
There are, or used to be, better protections against this sort of thing - the government putting its people in prison abroad - in English law.
The historic Habeas Corpus Act provides (basically) that the govt may not take an English subject, living in England, and imprison him outside of England, whether in a Crown colony or in a foreign territory. Remedies: Suits for false imprisonment, and punishing violators with loss of property and office. Also, no royal pardons for the official kidnappers.
https://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/1679-habeas-corpus-act
Subjects, yes. Citizens, yes. But Garcia is a subject/citizen of El Salvador, where he currently resides.
El Salvador President Says He Won’t Return Man Deported to His Country.
So, how do they get from “facilitate”, to getting him back here, when the government (el Salvador) that has him in custody refuses to give him back? Without violating Separation of Powers, by the Courts infringing the Executive’s power to conduct foreign policy?
Check, if not almost checkmate. Is the judge going to order te Secretary of State put pressure on El Salvador to get Garcia back? Or order the Secretary of Defense to order the 101st Airborne, or a SEAL team, to remove Garcia from the prison in El Salvador? I can see the judge maybe making that sort of order. But I don’t see the Supreme Court going along with that. Why not? Because what they have is soft power, based on the 200+ years of the Executive doing what the Judiciary demands, as long as what they demand doesn’t infringe the Executives core powers. And determining foreign policy or ordering the military to intervene would infringe the President’s core Constitutional powers.
My theory, right now, is that Trump and his Administration, are looking for the cases where the Supreme Court essentially has to back down. And, I think that this case, right now, is one of those cases. And their choice of “facilitate” over “effectuate” is evidence that they know where Trump’s line in the sand is here. We shall see.
If it's unconstitutional, how can the judge threaten to terminate it? The flip side of such a threat is that the program would continue if the guy is returned.
It seems like some of that freedom is given to him by the separation of powers doctrine. If the courts think they have the power to order the administration to do things, they should say what those things are and order them to do them.
It is commonly thought that the President himself is not subject to injunctions. The President himself apparently conspired with a person outside the court's jurisdiction to prevent the court's order from being carried out. If two people not subject to an injunction work to undermine it, is that defiance?
Illegal alien gets deported. No reason needs to be given for that. Period.
If Garcia has a civil rights cause, he should sue under 1983. He might win.
Judge Xinis is going to get Boasberged. These depositions are getting silly. Garcia aint coming back.
Worse, the Progressive left and Somin are playing right into Trumps hand. They are sticking up for an illegal alien gang member instead of ordinary americans. Trump loves this fight, and hes winning.