Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Me too unfortunately

MD senator Van Hollen is on the way to El Salvador to check up on Abrego Garcia.

His "Home" is El Salvador, no need to "fight"

Right now his home is CECOT, where he was transferred with no due process. Bukele has suspended due process for many of the incarcerated individuals in his jails. And Trump is trying to do so himself, despite the SC 9-0 ruling. Due process is a basic protection everyone in the US has under our constitution.

He is not currently in the USA so due process is not an issue. Your anger should be at Bukele if you do not like how he is treating one of his citizens.

The Supreme Court has no authority over this Man anymore, why is that so hard to understand? You can coulda, woulda, shoulda all day long, but at this point, he is an El Salvadorian in El Salvador. The USA has no jurisdiction no matter what they say/rule here.

But the Supreme Court does have authority in the US and can spank the daylights out of the government for initially depriving the man of due process and then flouting an order of a district court (affirmed 9-0 by the Supreme Court).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Again, she can order discovery, but if the goal is to impose contempt if the US Government doesn't exercise its Article II powers, that's a problem.

Serious question. If the President of El Salvador has refused to release him, what more can the judge order that doesn't violate separation of powers? Perhaps discovery may reveal that the US has a contractual right to ask for his return. But the El Salvador Government has already said no. One of the reasons given by the El Salvador Government is that the man is a member of MS-13, which has been deemed a foreign terrorist organization by the US. Is the judge going to order the President of the US to lift that declaration for him?

The El Salvadoran President said "No"to a question posed by a reporter. The US Government has not yet asked.

If the Us Government (Trump) asks and the El Salvadoran government says "No", that will probably render the entire program unconstitutional because the likelihood of an irremediable error is high. That deprives people of due process. And given that this case is about a "mistake", the government cannot say that the chances of error are so remote that there is no constitutional issue.

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.

Me too unfortunately

MD senator Van Hollen is on the way to El Salvador to check up on Abrego Garcia.

His "Home" is El Salvador, no need to "fight"

Well, Justice Department lawyers argued in a hearing yesterday that they are complying with the ruling to return Abrego Garcia because if he happened to show up at a US port of entry, agents would let him back into the US. Why would they let him back into the US if he did not have some legal status here? Keep up with the facts. Your feelings are not fact.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Me too unfortunately

MD senator Van Hollen is on the way to El Salvador to check up on Abrego Garcia.

His "Home" is El Salvador, no need to "fight"

Right now his home is CECOT, where he was transferred with no due process. Bukele has suspended due process for many of the incarcerated individuals in his jails. And Trump is trying to do so himself, despite the SC 9-0 ruling. Due process is a basic protection everyone in the US has under our constitution.

He is not currently in the USA so due process is not an issue. Your anger should be at Bukele if you do not like how he is treating one of his citizens.

The Supreme Court has no authority over this Man anymore, why is that so hard to understand? You can coulda, woulda, shoulda all day long, but at this point, he is an El Salvadorian in El Salvador. The USA has no jurisdiction no matter what they say/rule here.

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.

Me too unfortunately

MD senator Van Hollen is on the way to El Salvador to check up on Abrego Garcia.

His "Home" is El Salvador, no need to "fight"

Right now his home is CECOT, where he was transferred with no due process. Bukele has suspended due process for many of the incarcerated individuals in his jails. And Trump is trying to do so himself, despite the SC 9-0 ruling. Due process is a basic protection everyone in the US has under our constitution.

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.

Me too unfortunately

MD senator Van Hollen is on the way to El Salvador to check up on Abrego Garcia.

His "Home" is El Salvador, no need to "fight"

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.

Me too unfortunately

MD senator Van Hollen is on the way to El Salvador to check up on Abrego Garcia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Again, she can order discovery, but if the goal is to impose contempt if the US Government doesn't exercise its Article II powers, that's a problem.

Serious question. If the President of El Salvador has refused to release him, what more can the judge order that doesn't violate separation of powers? Perhaps discovery may reveal that the US has a contractual right to ask for his return. But the El Salvador Government has already said no. One of the reasons given by the El Salvador Government is that the man is a member of MS-13, which has been deemed a foreign terrorist organization by the US. Is the judge going to order the President of the US to lift that declaration for him?

DP. I’m not a lawyer and can’t address your question, but I just want to point out that the evidence that Abrego Garcia is MS13 is flimsy.
Here is the most thorough explanation of the evidence that I’ve seen. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/abrego-garcia-and-ms-13--what-do-we-know

Trump—and his authoritarian ally, Bukele—are playing a game with the US constitution and American system of justice. We’ll all have to wait and see who blinks first.

Maybe so, maybe not. If the question is the MS-13 evidence, then perhaps the court should start there? If that evidence is disproven, then that removes one reason for him to stay in El Salvador. That said, the US Government would also be entitled to discovery about the evidence supporting his claim that he would be targeted by gangs if he were returned to El Salvador. If that happens, then he stays in El Salvador.

Let's focus on the facts of the immediate case for a solution.

Trump‘s argument that he can’t bring someone back that he mistakenly deported is specious. In 2018, when he was following the law and there were actual guardrails, he brought back a man mistakenly deported to Iraq. “A refugee who had been living in the United States for nearly 25 years, Mr. Subaihani was among hundreds of Iraqis who had been protected from deportation under a federal court order.” The government admitted they had made a mistake and ICE spent months trying to track him down in Iraq, eventually bringing him back.

What’s different now? Trump is now a dictator and is saying FU to the law.

This Isn’t the First Time Trump Has Mistakenly Deported Someone
President Trump says he is powerless to retrieve a man who was deported because of an administrative error. But he has done so before.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/15/us/politics/trump-deportation-maryland-man.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Again, she can order discovery, but if the goal is to impose contempt if the US Government doesn't exercise its Article II powers, that's a problem.

Serious question. If the President of El Salvador has refused to release him, what more can the judge order that doesn't violate separation of powers? Perhaps discovery may reveal that the US has a contractual right to ask for his return. But the El Salvador Government has already said no. One of the reasons given by the El Salvador Government is that the man is a member of MS-13, which has been deemed a foreign terrorist organization by the US. Is the judge going to order the President of the US to lift that declaration for him?

You don’t seem to understand the basic concept that you are using to argue your BS point. Even the executive branch needs to follow the law. Why do you think this is not the case?

The highest law of the land is the Constitution.

Anonymous wrote:Bukeke already said he's not sending any El Salvador MS13 people back to US. They belong in El Salvador because they are citizens of El Salvador.

He didn't say that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Again, she can order discovery, but if the goal is to impose contempt if the US Government doesn't exercise its Article II powers, that's a problem.

Serious question. If the President of El Salvador has refused to release him, what more can the judge order that doesn't violate separation of powers? Perhaps discovery may reveal that the US has a contractual right to ask for his return. But the El Salvador Government has already said no. One of the reasons given by the El Salvador Government is that the man is a member of MS-13, which has been deemed a foreign terrorist organization by the US. Is the judge going to order the President of the US to lift that declaration for him?

DP. I’m not a lawyer and can’t address your question, but I just want to point out that the evidence that Abrego Garcia is MS13 is flimsy.
Here is the most thorough explanation of the evidence that I’ve seen. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/abrego-garcia-and-ms-13--what-do-we-know

Trump—and his authoritarian ally, Bukele—are playing a game with the US constitution and American system of justice. We’ll all have to wait and see who blinks first.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Again, she can order discovery, but if the goal is to impose contempt if the US Government doesn't exercise its Article II powers, that's a problem.

Serious question. If the President of El Salvador has refused to release him, what more can the judge order that doesn't violate separation of powers? Perhaps discovery may reveal that the US has a contractual right to ask for his return. But the El Salvador Government has already said no. One of the reasons given by the El Salvador Government is that the man is a member of MS-13, which has been deemed a foreign terrorist organization by the US. Is the judge going to order the President of the US to lift that declaration for him?

You don’t seem to understand the basic concept that you are using to argue your BS point. Even the executive branch needs to follow the law. Why do you think this is not the case?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Again, she can order discovery, but if the goal is to impose contempt if the US Government doesn't exercise its Article II powers, that's a problem.

Serious question. If the President of El Salvador has refused to release him, what more can the judge order that doesn't violate separation of powers? Perhaps discovery may reveal that the US has a contractual right to ask for his return. But the El Salvador Government has already said no. One of the reasons given by the El Salvador Government is that the man is a member of MS-13, which has been deemed a foreign terrorist organization by the US. Is the judge going to order the President of the US to lift that declaration for him?

Bukeke already said he's not sending any El Salvador MS13 people back to US. They belong in El Salvador because they are citizens of El Salvador.