Supreme Court Sides With Wrongly Deported Migrant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will take time, but the Law will eventually catch up to Trump's henchmen.

Remember, Trump may have immunity, but his henchmen don't.

How so? Still trying to figure out what was illegal.

forcing someone out of the country when they had legal right to be here would be here? That was illegal, but not sure they can be charged criminally for that. They could be charged for not following the court's order, though.

Um, the Supreme Court recognized that he could be deported, so he had no legal right to be here.

The lower court ordered that he could be deported, but not to El Salvador. So the Supreme Court said they should get him out of El Salvador.

The PP said he had a legal right to be in the US. He does not. He has a legal right to be deported anywhere but El Salvador.

Stop lying.

Withholding of removal grants you the right to remain in the United States. It allows you the right to apply for employment authorization. If he was working in the US he likely received his Employment Authorization Document.

In normal times, people with this status who have committed no crimes and are married to an American citizen do not get deported. Just like he didn't get deported during Trump 1.0

His deportation isn't barred.

We all know his deportation wasn't barred. The only one confused about his status is you.

He was absolutely legal and also his deportation (to any place in the world besides El Salvador) was not barred. Yet you keep claiming that he was "illegal" and did not have a legal right to be in the US.

If he was eligible for deportation, then he had no absolute legal right to remain in the US

Do you think changing the terms in each post when you're proven wrong tricks anyone?

Why don't you go spend some time on Google and at least get all the stories and the terms straight. No amount of cramming will allow you to catch up on all the history lessons you missed. But I'll give you a brief highlight: The US has historically not deported Green card holders, asylees, asylum seekers who passed their credible fear interview and are awaiting their hearing, individuals with a student visa, individuals with a valid work visa, individuals granted witholding of removal, etc when they have committed no crimes. Why? Because there is absolutely no good reason to do so. None. And there are so, so many reasons not to do so. I know you don't care about the ethical and humanitarian reasons but there are also huge economic reasons not do deport legal immigrants who have committed no crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will take time, but the Law will eventually catch up to Trump's henchmen.

Remember, Trump may have immunity, but his henchmen don't.

How so? Still trying to figure out what was illegal.

forcing someone out of the country when they had legal right to be here would be here? That was illegal, but not sure they can be charged criminally for that. They could be charged for not following the court's order, though.

Um, the Supreme Court recognized that he could be deported, so he had no legal right to be here.

The lower court ordered that he could be deported, but not to El Salvador. So the Supreme Court said they should get him out of El Salvador.

The PP said he had a legal right to be in the US. He does not. He has a legal right to be deported anywhere but El Salvador.

Stop lying.

Withholding of removal grants you the right to remain in the United States. It allows you the right to apply for employment authorization. If he was working in the US he likely received his Employment Authorization Document.

In normal times, people with this status who have committed no crimes and are married to an American citizen do not get deported. Just like he didn't get deported during Trump 1.0

His deportation isn't barred.

We all know his deportation wasn't barred. The only one confused about his status is you.

He was absolutely legal and also his deportation (to any place in the world besides El Salvador) was not barred. Yet you keep claiming that he was "illegal" and did not have a legal right to be in the US.

If he was eligible for deportation, then he had no absolute legal right to remain in the US

Do you think changing the terms in each post when you're proven wrong tricks anyone?

Why don't you go spend some time on Google and at least get all the stories and the terms straight. No amount of cramming will allow you to catch up on all the history lessons you missed. But I'll give you a brief highlight: The US has historically not deported Green card holders, asylees, asylum seekers who passed their credible fear interview and are awaiting their hearing, individuals with a student visa, individuals with a valid work visa, individuals granted witholding of removal, etc when they have committed no crimes. Why? Because there is absolutely no good reason to do so. None. And there are so, so many reasons not to do so. I know you don't care about the ethical and humanitarian reasons but there are also huge economic reasons not do deport legal immigrants who have committed no crimes.

Sigh. Talk about mealy mouthed. You used the word historically. Either Trump can legally deport him or he can't. He can and he is.

Democrats did a lot of things that historically weren't done, and ended up losing an election. Perhaps that will happen to Republicans, but not now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:El Salvador president Bukele will be meeting with Trump on Monday in the WH. Let’s see if they discuss this matter and what, if anything, comes of it. As of Friday, administration lawyers couldn’t/wouldn’t answer any of the judge’s questions about this deportee other than to confirm he was still in CECOT.

https://nypost.com/2025/04/11/us-news/judge-rips-trump-administrations-extremely-troubling-efforts-to-bring-back-wrongfully-deported-migrant-have-done-nothing/

We will find out if El Salvador is indeed more powerful than the United States.

Trump believes he can bring home hostages of war but is helpless when up against tiny El Salvador.

That's what his Truth Social post seems to suggest (see language highlighted in yellow).

Explain how he's ignoring the Supreme Court, which only ruled that he needed to take steps to facilitate, not effectuate his return. If Trump asked and was rebuffed, or if El Salvador has conditions, then that is a matter of foreign diplomacy that the Court specifically ruled was outside the purview of the judicial branch.

If Trump can’t bring him back, he’s the weakest President to ever serve. We are paying El Salvador to imprison people and can make future payments contingent on his return, never mind all the other leverage we have over one of the smallest countries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:El Salvador president Bukele will be meeting with Trump on Monday in the WH. Let’s see if they discuss this matter and what, if anything, comes of it. As of Friday, administration lawyers couldn’t/wouldn’t answer any of the judge’s questions about this deportee other than to confirm he was still in CECOT.

https://nypost.com/2025/04/11/us-news/judge-rips-trump-administrations-extremely-troubling-efforts-to-bring-back-wrongfully-deported-migrant-have-done-nothing/

We will find out if El Salvador is indeed more powerful than the United States.

Trump believes he can bring home hostages of war but is helpless when up against tiny El Salvador.

That's what his Truth Social post seems to suggest (see language highlighted in yellow).

Explain how he's ignoring the Supreme Court, which only ruled that he needed to take steps to facilitate, not effectuate his return. If Trump asked and was rebuffed, or if El Salvador has conditions, then that is a matter of foreign diplomacy that the Court specifically ruled was outside the purview of the judicial branch.

If Trump can’t bring him back, he’s the weakest President to ever serve. We are paying El Salvador to imprison people and can make future payments contingent on his return, never mind all the other leverage we have over one of the smallest countries.

Reporters will have a chance to ask President Bukele on Monday about this case. He’ll be meeting with Trump in the WH, and Trump usually allows the press to ask questions afterwards. Can’t wait to hear what either Bukele or Trump will say on this matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:El Salvador president Bukele will be meeting with Trump on Monday in the WH. Let’s see if they discuss this matter and what, if anything, comes of it. As of Friday, administration lawyers couldn’t/wouldn’t answer any of the judge’s questions about this deportee other than to confirm he was still in CECOT.

https://nypost.com/2025/04/11/us-news/judge-rips-trump-administrations-extremely-troubling-efforts-to-bring-back-wrongfully-deported-migrant-have-done-nothing/

We will find out if El Salvador is indeed more powerful than the United States.

Trump believes he can bring home hostages of war but is helpless when up against tiny El Salvador.

That's what his Truth Social post seems to suggest (see language highlighted in yellow).

Explain how he's ignoring the Supreme Court, which only ruled that he needed to take steps to facilitate, not effectuate his return. If Trump asked and was rebuffed, or if El Salvador has conditions, then that is a matter of foreign diplomacy that the Court specifically ruled was outside the purview of the judicial branch.

If Trump can’t bring him back, he’s the weakest President to ever serve. We are paying El Salvador to imprison people and can make future payments contingent on his return, never mind all the other leverage we have over one of the smallest countries.

.

He could, but no court can order him to do any of those things. Perhaps he doesn't want to jeopardize the larger relationship? El Salvador could offer the man some sort of protection, or investigate his original claim of potential harm if deported back to El Salvador. What if it does the latter and funds that the claim is not credible? That would be grounds for lifting the prior prohibition against repatriation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:El Salvador president Bukele will be meeting with Trump on Monday in the WH. Let’s see if they discuss this matter and what, if anything, comes of it. As of Friday, administration lawyers couldn’t/wouldn’t answer any of the judge’s questions about this deportee other than to confirm he was still in CECOT.

https://nypost.com/2025/04/11/us-news/judge-rips-trump-administrations-extremely-troubling-efforts-to-bring-back-wrongfully-deported-migrant-have-done-nothing/

We will find out if El Salvador is indeed more powerful than the United States.

Trump believes he can bring home hostages of war but is helpless when up against tiny El Salvador.

That's what his Truth Social post seems to suggest (see language highlighted in yellow).

Explain how he's ignoring the Supreme Court, which only ruled that he needed to take steps to facilitate, not effectuate his return. If Trump asked and was rebuffed, or if El Salvador has conditions, then that is a matter of foreign diplomacy that the Court specifically ruled was outside the purview of the judicial branch.

If Trump can’t bring him back, he’s the weakest President to ever serve. We are paying El Salvador to imprison people and can make future payments contingent on his return, never mind all the other leverage we have over one of the smallest countries.

.

He could, but no court can order him to do any of those things. Perhaps he doesn't want to jeopardize the larger relationship? El Salvador could offer the man some sort of protection, or investigate his original claim of potential harm if deported back to El Salvador. What if it does the latter and funds that the claim is not credible? That would be grounds for lifting the prior prohibition against repatriation.

We have a mechanism for that here, in an immigration court (although it isn't actually something we do, just as we do not remove someone to some other country after they receive withholding of removal to their country).

Bring him here and then do that.

[Anonymous]

Isn't he back home

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't he back home

No, cutie, he isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:El Salvador president Bukele will be meeting with Trump on Monday in the WH. Let’s see if they discuss this matter and what, if anything, comes of it. As of Friday, administration lawyers couldn’t/wouldn’t answer any of the judge’s questions about this deportee other than to confirm he was still in CECOT.

https://nypost.com/2025/04/11/us-news/judge-rips-trump-administrations-extremely-troubling-efforts-to-bring-back-wrongfully-deported-migrant-have-done-nothing/

We will find out if El Salvador is indeed more powerful than the United States.

Trump believes he can bring home hostages of war but is helpless when up against tiny El Salvador.

That's what his Truth Social post seems to suggest (see language highlighted in yellow).

Explain how he's ignoring the Supreme Court, which only ruled that he needed to take steps to facilitate, not effectuate his return. If Trump asked and was rebuffed, or if El Salvador has conditions, then that is a matter of foreign diplomacy that the Court specifically ruled was outside the purview of the judicial branch.

If Trump can’t bring him back, he’s the weakest President to ever serve. We are paying El Salvador to imprison people and can make future payments contingent on his return, never mind all the other leverage we have over one of the smallest countries.

.

He could, but no court can order him to do any of those things. Perhaps he doesn't want to jeopardize the larger relationship? El Salvador could offer the man some sort of protection, or investigate his original claim of potential harm if deported back to El Salvador. What if it does the latter and funds that the claim is not credible? That would be grounds for lifting the prior prohibition against repatriation.

We have a mechanism for that here, in an immigration court (although it isn't actually something we do, just as we do not remove someone to some other country after they receive withholding of removal to their country).

Bring him here and then do that.

How about the US embassy in El Salvador? Fly in an immigration judge and hold a hearing there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't he back home

No, cutie, he isn't.

DP. Yes he is. He is a citizen of El Salvador, currently residing in…… wait for it…. El Salvador.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't he back home

No, cutie, he isn't.

DP. Yes he is. He is a citizen of El Salvador, currently residing in…… wait for it…. El Salvador.

He is in a prison (he has never been charged or convicted of anything, here or there) for terrorists in a country that persecuted him so much that he was granted withholding from removal there and the only reason that he did not receive asylum here was because he filed too late. He had a credible fear then of gangs, which maybe now has been resolved. Now he has a new credible fear.

He is not home.

[Anonymous]

Wasn't there supposed to be another update today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't he back home

No, cutie, he isn't.

DP. Yes he is. He is a citizen of El Salvador, currently residing in…… wait for it…. El Salvador.

He is in a prison (he has never been charged or convicted of anything, here or there) for terrorists in a country that persecuted him so much that he was granted withholding from removal there and the only reason that he did not receive asylum here was because he filed too late. He had a credible fear then of gangs, which maybe now has been resolved. Now he has a new credible fear.

He is not home.

His government can simply release him from jail then. Wonder why they haven’t?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't there supposed to be another update today?

Right here.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815.65.0.pdf

Basically, telling the judge to do the physically impossible.

[Anonymous]

Just making up sh!t as usual.