Supreme Court Sides With Wrongly Deported Migrant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:El Salvador is a sovereign country. He is a citizen of El Salvador. You can't just send a plane and go pick someone up from there. Should another country be able to come pluck a US citizen from our soil and take them back to their country?

If that country is paying us to hold him for them, absolutely. Are you really this stupid?

He is a citizen of El Salvador. I doubt anyone outside of the US gives a crap about what our supreme court has ruled. If their president doesn't want to send him back, he won't. And what would we do about it? The SCOTUS doesn't have jurisdiction there.

Are you really this stupid?

I suspect this person is amazingly stupid.

Ask the people of El Salvador what they think of Bukele.

My understanding is he has cracked down on crime, with gang members a huge target. The people of El Salvador are THRILLED that Bukele is cracking down on crime and on gangs. He is their hero. The villagers are dancing in the streets.

Lots of people love the autocrat. — at the beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I put my money on he is as already dead and was . probably murdered the day he arrived at Trump's direction.

Me too unfortunately

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What Judge Xinis is banking on is that the government does not want to spend two weeks in discovery. Two big things can happen:

(1) They just make the call and get him back

(2) They spend two weeks creating a public record of their own screw-ups and then get sanctioned and then hope he is still alive and get him back.

God forbid he gets killed in prison, the backlash will be tremendous. It is already brewing.

Not really. With all due respect, she has to tread very carefully so as not to violate separation of powers. The Supreme Court has already admonished the district court (albeit politely). If the district court does it again through pursuing discovery to compel executive actions, that will not be a good look. This entire situation turns on the word "facilitate"

Perhaps the contract with El Salvador allows the US to ask for the return of someone improperly deported there. Even if it does, that may be of little use if the El Salvador government determines that such return would violate itsn own laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I put my money on he is as already dead and was . probably murdered the day he arrived at Trump's direction.

It’s been confirmed many times he’s alive. Just stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I put my money on he is as already dead and was . probably murdered the day he arrived at Trump's direction.

It’s been confirmed many times he’s alive. Just stop.

Confirmed by who? The liar in chief who ranted about Haitians eating pets?

[Anonymous]

Wouldn't this situation make it a lot harder for Trump to pull of foreign incarceration of citizens? It would be proof the govt has no inherent power to intervene in a situation involving a citizen serving a US sentence abroad, and can't even be trusted to have the will to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I put my money on he is as already dead and was . probably murdered the day he arrived at Trump's direction.

It’s been confirmed many times he’s alive. Just stop.

Confirmed by who? The liar in chief who ranted about Haitians eating pets?

His Lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I put my money on he is as already dead and was . probably murdered the day he arrived at Trump's direction.

It’s been confirmed many times he’s alive. Just stop.

Confirmed by who? The liar in chief who ranted about Haitians eating pets?

His Lawyer.

I need some actual proof of life before I believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What Judge Xinis is banking on is that the government does not want to spend two weeks in discovery. Two big things can happen:

(1) They just make the call and get him back

(2) They spend two weeks creating a public record of their own screw-ups and then get sanctioned and then hope he is still alive and get him back.

God forbid he gets killed in prison, the backlash will be tremendous. It is already brewing.

Not really. With all due respect, she has to tread very carefully so as not to violate separation of powers. The Supreme Court has already admonished the district court (albeit politely). If the district court does it again through pursuing discovery to compel executive actions, that will not be a good look. This entire situation turns on the word "facilitate"

Perhaps the contract with El Salvador allows the US to ask for the return of someone improperly deported there. Even if it does, that may be of little use if the El Salvador government determines that such return would violate itsn own laws

She is allowing discovery to determine what was done to facilitate his return. Failing to answer that as the administration (and you) have done is not a good look, as you say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What Judge Xinis is banking on is that the government does not want to spend two weeks in discovery. Two big things can happen:

(1) They just make the call and get him back

(2) They spend two weeks creating a public record of their own screw-ups and then get sanctioned and then hope he is still alive and get him back.

God forbid he gets killed in prison, the backlash will be tremendous. It is already brewing.

Not really. With all due respect, she has to tread very carefully so as not to violate separation of powers. The Supreme Court has already admonished the district court (albeit politely). If the district court does it again through pursuing discovery to compel executive actions, that will not be a good look. This entire situation turns on the word "facilitate"

Perhaps the contract with El Salvador allows the US to ask for the return of someone improperly deported there. Even if it does, that may be of little use if the El Salvador government determines that such return would violate itsn own laws

She is allowing discovery to determine what was done to facilitate his return. Failing to answer that as the administration (and you) have done is not a good look, as you say.

She's free to do that, within the bounds of separation of powers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I put my money on he is as already dead and was . probably murdered the day he arrived at Trump's direction.

It’s been confirmed many times he’s alive. Just stop.

Confirmed by who? The liar in chief who ranted about Haitians eating pets?

His Lawyer.

Liar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What Judge Xinis is banking on is that the government does not want to spend two weeks in discovery. Two big things can happen:

(1) They just make the call and get him back

(2) They spend two weeks creating a public record of their own screw-ups and then get sanctioned and then hope he is still alive and get him back.

God forbid he gets killed in prison, the backlash will be tremendous. It is already brewing.

Not really. With all due respect, she has to tread very carefully so as not to violate separation of powers. The Supreme Court has already admonished the district court (albeit politely). If the district court does it again through pursuing discovery to compel executive actions, that will not be a good look. This entire situation turns on the word "facilitate"

Perhaps the contract with El Salvador allows the US to ask for the return of someone improperly deported there. Even if it does, that may be of little use if the El Salvador government determines that such return would violate itsn own laws

She is allowing discovery to determine what was done to facilitate his return. Failing to answer that as the administration (and you) have done is not a good look, as you say.

She's free to do that, within the bounds of separation of powers.

There is no separation of powers issue in asking information about whether the government is complying with the order. SCOTUS itself told the government to provide that information. Stop being stupid.

[Anonymous]

There were two flights filled with Venezuelas that went to El Salvador. This guy was on another flight that had Salvadorans. It is not clear that the government paid El Salvador to put these guys in jail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:El Salvador is a sovereign country. He is a citizen of El Salvador. You can't just send a plane and go pick someone up from there. Should another country be able to come pluck a US citizen from our soil and take them back to their country?

If that country is paying us to hold him for them, absolutely. Are you really this stupid?

DP. Are you sure that the U.S. is paying for El Salvador to hold him?

“The Central American nation and Trump administration last month struck a deal to house migrants detained in the United States. The Trump administration contended that El Salvador could even house American citizens, though the U.S. cannot deport citizens to another country.

Rubio and Bukele discussed the specifics of the new transfer, which include a cost of about $20,000 to house each prisoner for the year. A State Department document also suggests that it may set aside $15 million to send to El Salvador to house additional members of the gang.”

https://apnews.com/article/trump-deportations-salvador-tren-aragua-64e72142a171ea57c869c3b35eeecce7

Isn't this for housing people who are not citizens of El Salvador? Where does it says the US is paying them to house their own citizens?

The US has paid 6 million so far for poisoners coming from the US. Doesn’t matter what country they were from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There were two flights filled with Venezuelas that went to El Salvador. This guy was on another flight that had Salvadorans. It is not clear that the government paid El Salvador to put these guys in jail.

They are paying for them too