Summary

The Trump administration is continuing to seemingly do everything it can to avoid securing the safe return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, wrongly deported to El Salvador last month due to an “administrative error.”

A senior State Department official signed a declaration swearing Abrego Garcia is “detained pursuant to the sovereign, domestic authority of El Salvador.”

Trump posted a message that confirms the U.S. is essentially wiping its hands of anyone deported: “These barbarians are now in the sole custody of El Salvador…and their future is up to President B and his Government.”

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the Trump administration must take steps to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return.

  • snekerpimp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    146
    ·
    6 days ago

    Ok, NOW are we in enough of a constitutional crisis to start getting upset??? I really feel like this is the incident that needs to be the breaking point.

      • markovs_gun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        6 days ago

        And even then as long as the first people they start gassing were accused of crimes at some point then you’re good

        • barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          6 days ago

          Not crimes, “terrorism.” Crimes have to be proven in court, but terrorism can be denied due process, so it doesnt have to be proven, just “designated.”

          Protest at a Tesla dealer? Terrorism, no trial. Write a post encouraging people to protest? Terrorism, no trial. Complain about ignoring SCOTUS rulings? Terrorism, no trial. Registered Democrat? The Democratuc party has been declared a Terrorist organization for supporting protests, all Democrats are Terrorists, no trial.

  • Lucky_777@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    6 days ago

    Supreme Court needs to start ordering arrests for contempt then. Put the Fanta Facist in jail for a month. Let Vance take over for a bit, just to send a message.

    Or start arresting cabinet members. Gotta do something if they violate your court orders. Or your courtroom means jack shit.

      • Lucky_777@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 days ago

        Sure, but violating a court order from the Supreme Court is the check and balances the country was founded on. Regardless of rulings made in the past. The Supreme Court orders you to do something, you do it. If the executive won’t comply then the executive needs to be removed by congress.

        To bad no one seems to care about following the constitution and how this government was setup. Looks like America had a good run, we’ll still be here, in some nasty shell of a country we once were.

        The scary thing is, we got the biggest stick. So you just put the world’s biggest stick in the hand of facists and people so greedy they don’t give a fuck about anything except their bank account.

  • barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    6 days ago

    This is the first practice run of many, leading up to the 2028 election. By the time we get there, they will have totally ignored so many SCOTUS rulings (and lower courts) that defying the 22nd amendment will be expected, and accepted.

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      6 days ago

      Nope. The judge said “there are no weekends in my court. Irreparable harm is being done, and until you bring the man back every day you will come here and tell the American people what actions you have taken”

      • mkwt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Which they failed to do yesterday.

        The judge demanded daily status updates on 3 questions. The filing yesterday only responded to question #1*, and completely ignored #2 and 3.

        *Additionally, the response to #1 only relayed publicly available information, when the judge specifically ordered an affidavit from someone with personal knowledge of the matter.