Chuck, respectfully, all you’ve pointed out is that he had suspicious clothes and that an anonymous source said he was a gang member. Perhaps the same source who said he had suspicious clothes? Who knows? He “failed to rebut the claim”? How exactly would,he do that? In what court was he given the opportunity? 0r was it to the same anonymous source that he failed to rebut the charge as he was being thrown into whatever vehicle they threw him into? Again who knows? This is not how this country works even for its visitors.
This person was spirited out of the country along with others to avoid any kind of scrutiny. You know that as well as I do. This administration, which never admits errors, admits it made an error, one it claims it cannot undo. That there is press sympathy for the guy is not high on the list of problems here.
The 4th Circuit (led by a truly conservative judge, joined by a truly liberal one and a centrist) nails it. There are still sane people who can, despite their different perspectives, look at a set of facts and together reach clarity.
As for that 4th circuit opinion, you can ignore it. It doesn’t address the merits of the case and is one of the most comical legal opinions I’ve read in some time. It has a distinct “can’t we all just get along here” quality that doesn’t belong in any judicial opinion. It reads like an Op-Ed piece for a feel good academic journal. Quite pathetic.
You don’t have a very good understanding of how immigration law and courts work. An immigration court is an administrative civil (not criminal) court, and it does not operate like an Article III court, the kind you’re probably thinking of. Different rules. Different everything. They are actually part of the DOJ. And you know who’s ultimately in charge of the DOJ. The AG who is responsible to the President.
The burden of proof for illegal aliens ( those who came in contrary to law and were not admitted under color of law), he must prove clearly and beyond a doubt he is legally entitled to be admitted. In cases of suspected gang activity, confidential informant information is perfectly admissible. If you’ve read the immigration trial judge ruling on Garcia, there’s little doubt he was MS13. He was arrested in the company of known and proved MS13 members, had cash (altered to remove eyes, ears mouth of pictured president, see, hear, say nothing) with MS13 markings; and was wearing well established gang clothing. He was in the company of one MS13 member implicated in a murder. He had a known MS13 assigned nickname. He had also been stopped in Tennessee by state trooper who pulled him over driving. with 8 individuals in the vehicle on their way to Md from Texas (I believe) and all of the occupants when asked their home address have Garcia’s home address. He was suspected of human trafficking. He had had two protection orders issued against him in favor of a girlfriend who said he beat her with his boot.
He was determined to be deportable, just not to El Salvador. That was his Due Process under law. He lost his appeal. He also made an asylum claim that was also denied after hearing ( because he filed that claim well past the date required by law).
I wouldn’t be thinking this guy deserves to come back here. He is the absolute loser gang guy the Dems should run from but they’ve decided to run cover for him. And in fact, the scotus ruling this past week doesn’t require it. It requires only that the administration try to “ facilitate” his “release from custody in El Salvador.” It expressly does NOT require his return to the US. I imagine some deal will be worked out eventually that he’ll be shuttled to Mexico. He won’t be returning to the US unless SCOTUS changes its ruling. And that’ll be a blue moon after finding hen’s teeth.
All of this info is available online by googling wisely.
Please do not question my credentials and I will not question yours. Also, I have no credentials. But I have read the Constitution, once even at a Holiday Inn Express (they’re pet friendly), as well as the facts of this case.
Garcia, who is a person and therefore has some due process rights per said Constitution, did indeed have a hearing in front of an immigration judge… in 2019. As you say, immigration judges are not judges despite the titles and robes. For example, Congress granted the Attorney General authority to ignore their rulings. But neither are they simply order-taking flunkies of the DOJ; Congress required them to act impartially, that is to follow the facts, but also the law and precedent decisions. That’s maybe why they get to wear the robes. The “judge” in 2019 presumably earned his robe. As to the facts, the judge reviewed the evidence available, including a report (which both you and Chuck cite extensively) prepared by the Prince George’s County police department. The PG police did not believe Garcia was a gang member nor did they charge him with a crime; he had been picked up in a Home Depot parking lot looking for day labor. The judge heard testimony from Garcia as to ICE’s claim of gang membership and his claim of asylum, concluding that, “(Garcia) provided credible responses to the questions asked. His testimony was internally consistent, externally consistent with his asylum application and other documents, and appeared free of embellishment. Further, he provided substantial documentation buttressing his claims…. The court finds (Garcia) credible.” But the judge also followed the law, which provided that because Garcia had not claimed asylum within the required one year of entry into the US (in 2016), he was deportable, just not to El Salvador. The judge did not need to rule on whether Garcia was in a gang because in any case Garcia was, as you say, deportable. In other words, the judge did the job within its limits, leaving the matter in the hands of ICE. But the Trump administration did not deport Garcia. AG Barr did not overrule the judge’s ruling. ICE did not even appeal to the next level of “judges”. Instead they released Garcia in the US where he would be entitled to work, obtain a drivers license, etc. The Garcias had a child, who is autistic. In 2021, Garcia’s wife (a US citizen) did seek a protective order alleging domestic violence, as you say. He was not arrested. She dropped her efforts and today strongly advocates for his removal from El Salvador. This of course does not mean the domestic violence didn’t occur. Again, however, Garcia was not deported. In 2022, Garcia was “suspected of human trafficking” by no less an authority than the Tennessee highway patrolman who pulled him over for speeding. The trooper may not have been too worried though, as he didn’t arrest Garcia, or even issue him a traffic ticket. Garcia later got a job as a union apprentice.
So, in the nine years Garcia was in the US, what do we know? He entered the country illegally. He got married. He looked for work outside Home Depot. He gave testimony and evidence an immigration judge found credible enough to forbid his deportation to El Salvador. The Trump administration passed on deporting him elsewhere, instead releasing him. He and his wife had a son. His wife made then dropped domestic violence claims. He got a warning for speeding. He got a job. He was never charged with any crime.
None of this makes Garcia a leading candidate for Person of the Year. In fact, none of it prevents ICE from summarily deporting him. Just, not to… well, you know… the place he was flown 72 hours after being detained by ICE near his home. No hearing. No nothing. ICE agents did wait for Ms. Garcia to collect their son, whom Garcia had picked up from school. That was genuinely decent of them. As you know, the Supreme Court, which is (to the surprise of some) composed of actual judges whom AG’s don’t have authority to ignore, unanimously ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” Garcia’s return. The administration believed this required it to send an Uber to BWI. On second thought, maybe just a Lyft. And now the 4th Circuit, which is also actual judges, has disabused the administration of this facile interpretation. As I write, President Trump seems to be reveling in his perceived power to ignore courts, wishing he could do it more often.
Why can’t we just acknowledge the obvious. The Trump administration is rounding up those it believes it has the unfettered authority to deport, and getting them out of the country as quickly as possible to avoid scrutiny. In many cases, it does indeed have said authority, whether the deportees are “gang losers”, highly respected members of their HOA boards, or perhaps both. (Deporting the HOA board is something I can get behind.) In its haste, the administration got sloppy with Garcia (which would be vaguely Passover appropriate, if he were matzoh). Rather than just deal with it, Trump has chosen to flaunt his defiance of a unanimous Supreme Court order. (You know when you’ve lost Justice Thomas, you’ve really lost the room.) In fact, why can’t we admit few of us really give a crap about Garcia. Rather, what we do and should care about is that this administration ignores even the most polite and modest checks on its perceived authority, and belittles or bullies those behind them. Sort of like, you know, dictators.
I don’t know what’s on Garcia’s knuckles. But the 4th Circuit’s opinion very much acknowledges your point, concluding that if the government is so sure of its conclusion then it should be confident in the results of the hearing to which Garcia is entitled.
We all know what’s driving this. The President doesn’t want *any* constraints on his authority to deport non-citizens or prevent entry, the criteria he uses, etc. He’s using an example he believes the public will support to make his point and putting pressure on the judiciary to capitulate notwithstanding both law and precedent. I don’t want that much power in one person’s hands. Perhaps you do.
Eh, I don’t care if they bring Garcia back. He may be entitled to one more hearing, to determine his ultimate destination. But I don’t see any way for him to remain in the US.
Personally, I’d be happier if they’d focus on deporting illegal aliens who don’t have any sort of hold on them. It’s not like those are in short supply.
Clearly the plan is to adjudicate each deportation(of the millions necessary) individually. In addition trying to tie up everything the Trump administration wishes to accomplish in court
I’m also amused by all the desperate hand wringing over this deportation contrasted with the stunning silence when Obama Droned/killed an AMERICAN CITIZEN overseas.
Why, yes, if we are going to deport millions, we will need to add judges. I agree that the current backlog is intolerable.
The idea that potential deportees are entitled to a hearing has been upheld by Scalia and Kavanaugh, not exactly liberals. (We can discuss expedited removal of people caught near the border some other time, since it doesn't apply here.)
I was perturbed by Obama, but it is also true that we killed American citizens in WW2, unfortunate dual citizens who were in Germany, Italy, or Japan when we entered the war, and who were conscripted into enemy armies. They were not, of course, entitled to any sort of trial on the battlefield.
I believe the MSM gets off on lying. Look at what Jake Tapper is doing—after years of loudly covering up for a diminished Joe Biden—he's writing a book about how he was duped by others. The press will not learn until they are driven out of business.
Re "and the Respondent has failed to present evidence to rebut that assertion [that he is a gang member]," an assertion by an unknown accuser. Ask yourself, after you are dragged before a judge and charged with being a gang member by some unknown accuser, how exactly do you "rebut that assertion"?! Do you show a diary which accounts for all your activities for the last 3 mos? Do you point to a letter to the editor you wrote in which you condemned gangs? None of this will do--because being accused in this way is itself taken as proof. According to this way of thinking, no innocent person would be accused by the unknown accuser, 'Respondent,' particularly when the person was judged unfavorably at "Breaking Battlegrounds."
And according to this way of thinking, habeas corpus, which has been the cornerstone of individual liberty since 12th century in England, later affirmed in Magna Carta, and much later in the US Constitution, is a dead-letter after only a 2 months of Trump (who deported the accused in defiance of a court ordered habeas). And what's the "Breaking Battlegrounds" story? That oh well the guy denied habeas might not be a model citizen.
It would seem that our fundamental right to trail and due process depends whether "Breaking Battlegrounds" approves of us. This is toady journalism at its worst.
The evidence was exactly as I described it: some guy, “Respondent”, said he believed Garcia was a gang member. The court allowed that was sufficient evidence he was a gang member. Another court ruled that Garcia could not be deported without a trial. Trump had him deported despite the court’s order, in what the administration admits was an error. But he refuses to rectify the error. If this stands it means Trump can “mistakenly” disappear anyone to a foreign prison. And he *says* he wants to disappear Americans to Salvadorian prisons. If this stands, it means there are no longer any promise of basic liberties to Americans, unless perhaps you bend a knee to MAGA ideology.
Yeah, the more I learn about this guy, the more evident it is that he is a scumbag. He may, in fact, be entitled to an additional hearing, so bring him back, give him his hearing, and THEN deport him.
By the way, did anyone else wonder how come his head had not been shaved?
So, the detective who claimed he was in MS–13 was fired for working with prostitutes, and the informant he used placed Abrego García in western New York, which can't be correct. You should also remember that the standard of proof for a bond hearing is lower than for criminal conviction.
But, really, what you ought to do is reread this paragraph from the Fourth Circuit until you understand it.
[quote]
The government asserts that Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS-13.
Perhaps, but perhaps not. Regardless, he is still entitled to due process. If the government
is confident of its position, it should be assured that position will prevail in proceedings to
terminate the withholding of removal order. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.24(f) (requiring that the
government prove “by a preponderance of evidence” that the alien is no longer entitled to
a withholding of removal). Moreover, the government has conceded that Abrego Garcia
"But for some reason, as it’s becoming easier to call the media on their lies, journalists at places like The Atlantic are lying even more."
They *must* double down. The Left is bereft of ideas, popular policy, leaders, and reasonable constituents. All they have is the far left anti-Capitalist* hypocritical lunacy of Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez.
The Atlantic et al are part of the *State*, not the awakened and awakening People.
* I speak of true Capitalism, not the crony-ism of captured corporations in media, healthcare, etc.
Ha!! You sure showed me! That elegant rebuttal really showcased your mental prowess. I can’t keep up with that. 😂
Listen, Abrego might be MS-13, he might not be. We have no idea because he hasn’t received due process. That’s the real issue at stake here. It’s fundamental to our constitutional system.
I read through your post. I agree with you that due process can be different depending on your immigration status, age, profession, etc. Kilmar is covered by a different set of laws than a full citizen. That’s fine. But the government is still obligated to follow whichever laws apply to Kilmar’s situation. That’s due process.
Now in a recent ruling the Supreme Court "requires the Government to 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador." This is an affirmation of the lower court’s ruling (Judge Xinis) which directly states that due process was NOT followed and that the government has the obligation to remedy the situation.
So your assertion that due process somehow was followed in Kilmar’s case doesn’t align with the Supreme Court’s view. And if the Trump admin continues to defy the Supreme Court’s order then we’re likely headed towards a constitutional crisis.
Thank for clarifying that the "error" was sending him to El Salvador, not deporting him.
Chuck, respectfully, all you’ve pointed out is that he had suspicious clothes and that an anonymous source said he was a gang member. Perhaps the same source who said he had suspicious clothes? Who knows? He “failed to rebut the claim”? How exactly would,he do that? In what court was he given the opportunity? 0r was it to the same anonymous source that he failed to rebut the charge as he was being thrown into whatever vehicle they threw him into? Again who knows? This is not how this country works even for its visitors.
This person was spirited out of the country along with others to avoid any kind of scrutiny. You know that as well as I do. This administration, which never admits errors, admits it made an error, one it claims it cannot undo. That there is press sympathy for the guy is not high on the list of problems here.
The 4th Circuit (led by a truly conservative judge, joined by a truly liberal one and a centrist) nails it. There are still sane people who can, despite their different perspectives, look at a set of facts and together reach clarity.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca4.178400/gov.uscourts.ca4.178400.8.0.pdf
As for that 4th circuit opinion, you can ignore it. It doesn’t address the merits of the case and is one of the most comical legal opinions I’ve read in some time. It has a distinct “can’t we all just get along here” quality that doesn’t belong in any judicial opinion. It reads like an Op-Ed piece for a feel good academic journal. Quite pathetic.
You don’t have a very good understanding of how immigration law and courts work. An immigration court is an administrative civil (not criminal) court, and it does not operate like an Article III court, the kind you’re probably thinking of. Different rules. Different everything. They are actually part of the DOJ. And you know who’s ultimately in charge of the DOJ. The AG who is responsible to the President.
The burden of proof for illegal aliens ( those who came in contrary to law and were not admitted under color of law), he must prove clearly and beyond a doubt he is legally entitled to be admitted. In cases of suspected gang activity, confidential informant information is perfectly admissible. If you’ve read the immigration trial judge ruling on Garcia, there’s little doubt he was MS13. He was arrested in the company of known and proved MS13 members, had cash (altered to remove eyes, ears mouth of pictured president, see, hear, say nothing) with MS13 markings; and was wearing well established gang clothing. He was in the company of one MS13 member implicated in a murder. He had a known MS13 assigned nickname. He had also been stopped in Tennessee by state trooper who pulled him over driving. with 8 individuals in the vehicle on their way to Md from Texas (I believe) and all of the occupants when asked their home address have Garcia’s home address. He was suspected of human trafficking. He had had two protection orders issued against him in favor of a girlfriend who said he beat her with his boot.
He was determined to be deportable, just not to El Salvador. That was his Due Process under law. He lost his appeal. He also made an asylum claim that was also denied after hearing ( because he filed that claim well past the date required by law).
I wouldn’t be thinking this guy deserves to come back here. He is the absolute loser gang guy the Dems should run from but they’ve decided to run cover for him. And in fact, the scotus ruling this past week doesn’t require it. It requires only that the administration try to “ facilitate” his “release from custody in El Salvador.” It expressly does NOT require his return to the US. I imagine some deal will be worked out eventually that he’ll be shuttled to Mexico. He won’t be returning to the US unless SCOTUS changes its ruling. And that’ll be a blue moon after finding hen’s teeth.
All of this info is available online by googling wisely.
Please do not question my credentials and I will not question yours. Also, I have no credentials. But I have read the Constitution, once even at a Holiday Inn Express (they’re pet friendly), as well as the facts of this case.
Garcia, who is a person and therefore has some due process rights per said Constitution, did indeed have a hearing in front of an immigration judge… in 2019. As you say, immigration judges are not judges despite the titles and robes. For example, Congress granted the Attorney General authority to ignore their rulings. But neither are they simply order-taking flunkies of the DOJ; Congress required them to act impartially, that is to follow the facts, but also the law and precedent decisions. That’s maybe why they get to wear the robes. The “judge” in 2019 presumably earned his robe. As to the facts, the judge reviewed the evidence available, including a report (which both you and Chuck cite extensively) prepared by the Prince George’s County police department. The PG police did not believe Garcia was a gang member nor did they charge him with a crime; he had been picked up in a Home Depot parking lot looking for day labor. The judge heard testimony from Garcia as to ICE’s claim of gang membership and his claim of asylum, concluding that, “(Garcia) provided credible responses to the questions asked. His testimony was internally consistent, externally consistent with his asylum application and other documents, and appeared free of embellishment. Further, he provided substantial documentation buttressing his claims…. The court finds (Garcia) credible.” But the judge also followed the law, which provided that because Garcia had not claimed asylum within the required one year of entry into the US (in 2016), he was deportable, just not to El Salvador. The judge did not need to rule on whether Garcia was in a gang because in any case Garcia was, as you say, deportable. In other words, the judge did the job within its limits, leaving the matter in the hands of ICE. But the Trump administration did not deport Garcia. AG Barr did not overrule the judge’s ruling. ICE did not even appeal to the next level of “judges”. Instead they released Garcia in the US where he would be entitled to work, obtain a drivers license, etc. The Garcias had a child, who is autistic. In 2021, Garcia’s wife (a US citizen) did seek a protective order alleging domestic violence, as you say. He was not arrested. She dropped her efforts and today strongly advocates for his removal from El Salvador. This of course does not mean the domestic violence didn’t occur. Again, however, Garcia was not deported. In 2022, Garcia was “suspected of human trafficking” by no less an authority than the Tennessee highway patrolman who pulled him over for speeding. The trooper may not have been too worried though, as he didn’t arrest Garcia, or even issue him a traffic ticket. Garcia later got a job as a union apprentice.
So, in the nine years Garcia was in the US, what do we know? He entered the country illegally. He got married. He looked for work outside Home Depot. He gave testimony and evidence an immigration judge found credible enough to forbid his deportation to El Salvador. The Trump administration passed on deporting him elsewhere, instead releasing him. He and his wife had a son. His wife made then dropped domestic violence claims. He got a warning for speeding. He got a job. He was never charged with any crime.
None of this makes Garcia a leading candidate for Person of the Year. In fact, none of it prevents ICE from summarily deporting him. Just, not to… well, you know… the place he was flown 72 hours after being detained by ICE near his home. No hearing. No nothing. ICE agents did wait for Ms. Garcia to collect their son, whom Garcia had picked up from school. That was genuinely decent of them. As you know, the Supreme Court, which is (to the surprise of some) composed of actual judges whom AG’s don’t have authority to ignore, unanimously ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” Garcia’s return. The administration believed this required it to send an Uber to BWI. On second thought, maybe just a Lyft. And now the 4th Circuit, which is also actual judges, has disabused the administration of this facile interpretation. As I write, President Trump seems to be reveling in his perceived power to ignore courts, wishing he could do it more often.
Why can’t we just acknowledge the obvious. The Trump administration is rounding up those it believes it has the unfettered authority to deport, and getting them out of the country as quickly as possible to avoid scrutiny. In many cases, it does indeed have said authority, whether the deportees are “gang losers”, highly respected members of their HOA boards, or perhaps both. (Deporting the HOA board is something I can get behind.) In its haste, the administration got sloppy with Garcia (which would be vaguely Passover appropriate, if he were matzoh). Rather than just deal with it, Trump has chosen to flaunt his defiance of a unanimous Supreme Court order. (You know when you’ve lost Justice Thomas, you’ve really lost the room.) In fact, why can’t we admit few of us really give a crap about Garcia. Rather, what we do and should care about is that this administration ignores even the most polite and modest checks on its perceived authority, and belittles or bullies those behind them. Sort of like, you know, dictators.
What about the “MS 13” tattoo on his knuckles?
I agree that he may be entitled to an additional immigration hearing, but he will still be deported.
I don’t know what’s on Garcia’s knuckles. But the 4th Circuit’s opinion very much acknowledges your point, concluding that if the government is so sure of its conclusion then it should be confident in the results of the hearing to which Garcia is entitled.
We all know what’s driving this. The President doesn’t want *any* constraints on his authority to deport non-citizens or prevent entry, the criteria he uses, etc. He’s using an example he believes the public will support to make his point and putting pressure on the judiciary to capitulate notwithstanding both law and precedent. I don’t want that much power in one person’s hands. Perhaps you do.
Eh, I don’t care if they bring Garcia back. He may be entitled to one more hearing, to determine his ultimate destination. But I don’t see any way for him to remain in the US.
Personally, I’d be happier if they’d focus on deporting illegal aliens who don’t have any sort of hold on them. It’s not like those are in short supply.
Clearly the plan is to adjudicate each deportation(of the millions necessary) individually. In addition trying to tie up everything the Trump administration wishes to accomplish in court
I’m also amused by all the desperate hand wringing over this deportation contrasted with the stunning silence when Obama Droned/killed an AMERICAN CITIZEN overseas.
And what about Israel killing a teenager with dual US/Palestinian citizenship, because he was throwing rocks at tanks?
Why, yes, if we are going to deport millions, we will need to add judges. I agree that the current backlog is intolerable.
The idea that potential deportees are entitled to a hearing has been upheld by Scalia and Kavanaugh, not exactly liberals. (We can discuss expedited removal of people caught near the border some other time, since it doesn't apply here.)
I was perturbed by Obama, but it is also true that we killed American citizens in WW2, unfortunate dual citizens who were in Germany, Italy, or Japan when we entered the war, and who were conscripted into enemy armies. They were not, of course, entitled to any sort of trial on the battlefield.
Gang member can't be deported because he's a gang member? "Asylum" is just "send people to the US to go be someone else's problem."
I believe the MSM gets off on lying. Look at what Jake Tapper is doing—after years of loudly covering up for a diminished Joe Biden—he's writing a book about how he was duped by others. The press will not learn until they are driven out of business.
Re "and the Respondent has failed to present evidence to rebut that assertion [that he is a gang member]," an assertion by an unknown accuser. Ask yourself, after you are dragged before a judge and charged with being a gang member by some unknown accuser, how exactly do you "rebut that assertion"?! Do you show a diary which accounts for all your activities for the last 3 mos? Do you point to a letter to the editor you wrote in which you condemned gangs? None of this will do--because being accused in this way is itself taken as proof. According to this way of thinking, no innocent person would be accused by the unknown accuser, 'Respondent,' particularly when the person was judged unfavorably at "Breaking Battlegrounds."
And according to this way of thinking, habeas corpus, which has been the cornerstone of individual liberty since 12th century in England, later affirmed in Magna Carta, and much later in the US Constitution, is a dead-letter after only a 2 months of Trump (who deported the accused in defiance of a court ordered habeas). And what's the "Breaking Battlegrounds" story? That oh well the guy denied habeas might not be a model citizen.
It would seem that our fundamental right to trail and due process depends whether "Breaking Battlegrounds" approves of us. This is toady journalism at its worst.
It’d be good to see the evidence firsthand that he was tied to the gang. But judges won’t just accept evidence based of hearsay and rumor
The evidence was exactly as I described it: some guy, “Respondent”, said he believed Garcia was a gang member. The court allowed that was sufficient evidence he was a gang member. Another court ruled that Garcia could not be deported without a trial. Trump had him deported despite the court’s order, in what the administration admits was an error. But he refuses to rectify the error. If this stands it means Trump can “mistakenly” disappear anyone to a foreign prison. And he *says* he wants to disappear Americans to Salvadorian prisons. If this stands, it means there are no longer any promise of basic liberties to Americans, unless perhaps you bend a knee to MAGA ideology.
That's all there was: a crooked detective and a worthless informant. I don't think the evidence would have prevailed in a full trial.
Trying to make Abrego Garcia another Saint George of Floyd. He only needs to be a Martyr.
but that MSM media "horse is out of the barn".
Deep Statists have the problem of making these Illegal Gang Members into "Victims", while wanting to Unleash them for Domestic Chaos.
but We/Me/You shall soon see, Summertime can make Hottimes if you get the democRats' drift.
CYA, Conduct Yourselves Accordingly, Si vis pacem para bellum
Yeah, the more I learn about this guy, the more evident it is that he is a scumbag. He may, in fact, be entitled to an additional hearing, so bring him back, give him his hearing, and THEN deport him.
By the way, did anyone else wonder how come his head had not been shaved?
So, the detective who claimed he was in MS–13 was fired for working with prostitutes, and the informant he used placed Abrego García in western New York, which can't be correct. You should also remember that the standard of proof for a bond hearing is lower than for criminal conviction.
But, really, what you ought to do is reread this paragraph from the Fourth Circuit until you understand it.
[quote]
The government asserts that Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS-13.
Perhaps, but perhaps not. Regardless, he is still entitled to due process. If the government
is confident of its position, it should be assured that position will prevail in proceedings to
terminate the withholding of removal order. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.24(f) (requiring that the
government prove “by a preponderance of evidence” that the alien is no longer entitled to
a withholding of removal). Moreover, the government has conceded that Abrego Garcia
was wrongly or “mistakenly” deported.
"But for some reason, as it’s becoming easier to call the media on their lies, journalists at places like The Atlantic are lying even more."
They *must* double down. The Left is bereft of ideas, popular policy, leaders, and reasonable constituents. All they have is the far left anti-Capitalist* hypocritical lunacy of Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez.
The Atlantic et al are part of the *State*, not the awakened and awakening People.
* I speak of true Capitalism, not the crony-ism of captured corporations in media, healthcare, etc.
https://foreignlocal.substack.com/p/the-america-last-spokeswoman
The two links you provide for the immigration court decisions point to the same document.
Marijuana = Weed
X eyed smiley = Wasted
Cross = Jesus
Skull = Death
WWJD? I think we just “proved” he’s a Christian! 😂
Unless you could show that this is common MS-13 tattoo I don’t think your Rorschach test would stand up in court.
I'm not sure why Skull=3, and I'm especially curious since wouldn't you use cráneo?
This is turning into a Rorschach test. You’re seeing what you want to see.
Ha!! You sure showed me! That elegant rebuttal really showcased your mental prowess. I can’t keep up with that. 😂
Listen, Abrego might be MS-13, he might not be. We have no idea because he hasn’t received due process. That’s the real issue at stake here. It’s fundamental to our constitutional system.
I read through your post. I agree with you that due process can be different depending on your immigration status, age, profession, etc. Kilmar is covered by a different set of laws than a full citizen. That’s fine. But the government is still obligated to follow whichever laws apply to Kilmar’s situation. That’s due process.
Now in a recent ruling the Supreme Court "requires the Government to 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador." This is an affirmation of the lower court’s ruling (Judge Xinis) which directly states that due process was NOT followed and that the government has the obligation to remedy the situation.
So your assertion that due process somehow was followed in Kilmar’s case doesn’t align with the Supreme Court’s view. And if the Trump admin continues to defy the Supreme Court’s order then we’re likely headed towards a constitutional crisis.