6 ms·

Justice Roberts empowering Trump in order to avoid seeing what would happen if the administration got held in contempt.

goatlover 2y ago
It's interesting that Amy Coney Barrett sided with the dissent and not Roberts. The big ruling will be on returning the Maryland man who was accidentally deported to an El Salvadoran prison. I can't imagine them siding with Trump's lawyers on that, they're blatantly in the wrong and have been told so by 4 judges now. That would be extremely worrying if SCOTUS upheld his deportation.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- rayiner 2y ago
  Are you aware that an immigration judge found the man deportable for connections to MS13 and the Board of Immigration appeals affirmed?
  - dcrazy 2y ago
    Immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals are part of the Executive Branch. The court has held that executive actions must be subject to review by an Article III court.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      That's incorrect. Lots of immigration decisions are judicially unreviewable, such as visa revocations: https://www.boundless.com/blog/supreme-court-rules-courts-cant-review-visa-revocations https://www.boundless.com/blog/supreme-court-rules-courts-ca.... The Supreme Court has also never held that non-citizens have a right to an Article III judicial determination to challenge deportation. The current immigration laws provide for many circumstances where deportation is judicially unreviewable, and indeed does not even require a determination by an administrative immigration judge: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/expedited-removal https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/expedite...
  - goatlover 2y ago
    I'm aware an immigration judge in 2019 withheld his removal and there was an unreliable witnesses claiming they heard him say he had connections, but that was in NY, not Maryland where Abrego Garcia lives. I'm also aware the Trump administration admitted they made a mistake in deporting him. Why they won't just bring him back is disturbing. He has a wife and 3 children who are all US citizens. Nobody should be defending this.
    - dataflow 2y ago
      > Why they won't just bring him back is disturbing. He has a wife and 3 children who are all US citizens. Nobody should be defending this. Without opining on whether he should be brought back: it seems kind of a slippery slope (legally speaking) to suggest that someone should be brought back because of their family, no? I'm not sure I'd want courts to decide that people should also be subject to deportation or other punishments because of their families.
      - defrost 2y ago
        The actual topography here, rather than any hypothetical buttered slope, is a man was deported in defiance of pre existing court orders that he not be deported. Is it correct that you are in favour of courts being involved in deportation decisions and those decisions being respected and paid heed to?
        rayiner 2y ago
        > The actual topography here, rather than any hypothetical buttered slope, is a man was deported without in defiance of pre existing court orders that he not be deported. False. Garcia was concededly subject to deportation except to El Salvador. And that condition prohibiting removal to El Salvador was not issued by a "court," but rather by an immigration judge (executive branch employee).
        goatlover 2y ago
        Was that because they were in a rush to ignore a judge's order temporarily halting the deportations?

It's interesting that Amy Coney Barrett sided with the dissent and not Roberts. The big ruling will be on returning the Maryland man who was accidentally deported to an El Salvadoran prison. I can't imagine them siding with Trump's lawyers on that, they're blatantly in the wrong and have been told so by 4 judges now. That would be extremely worrying if SCOTUS upheld his deportation.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
rayiner 2y ago
Are you aware that an immigration judge found the man deportable for connections to MS13 and the Board of Immigration appeals affirmed?
- dcrazy 2y ago
  Immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals are part of the Executive Branch. The court has held that executive actions must be subject to review by an Article III court.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    That's incorrect. Lots of immigration decisions are judicially unreviewable, such as visa revocations: https://www.boundless.com/blog/supreme-court-rules-courts-cant-review-visa-revocations https://www.boundless.com/blog/supreme-court-rules-courts-ca.... The Supreme Court has also never held that non-citizens have a right to an Article III judicial determination to challenge deportation. The current immigration laws provide for many circumstances where deportation is judicially unreviewable, and indeed does not even require a determination by an administrative immigration judge: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/expedited-removal https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/expedite...
- goatlover 2y ago
  I'm aware an immigration judge in 2019 withheld his removal and there was an unreliable witnesses claiming they heard him say he had connections, but that was in NY, not Maryland where Abrego Garcia lives. I'm also aware the Trump administration admitted they made a mistake in deporting him. Why they won't just bring him back is disturbing. He has a wife and 3 children who are all US citizens. Nobody should be defending this.
  - dataflow 2y ago
    > Why they won't just bring him back is disturbing. He has a wife and 3 children who are all US citizens. Nobody should be defending this. Without opining on whether he should be brought back: it seems kind of a slippery slope (legally speaking) to suggest that someone should be brought back because of their family, no? I'm not sure I'd want courts to decide that people should also be subject to deportation or other punishments because of their families.
    - defrost 2y ago
      The actual topography here, rather than any hypothetical buttered slope, is a man was deported in defiance of pre existing court orders that he not be deported. Is it correct that you are in favour of courts being involved in deportation decisions and those decisions being respected and paid heed to?
      - rayiner 2y ago
        > The actual topography here, rather than any hypothetical buttered slope, is a man was deported without in defiance of pre existing court orders that he not be deported. False. Garcia was concededly subject to deportation except to El Salvador. And that condition prohibiting removal to El Salvador was not issued by a "court," but rather by an immigration judge (executive branch employee).
        goatlover 2y ago
        Was that because they were in a rush to ignore a judge's order temporarily halting the deportations?