The Soviet-style mass roundups — not in Russia, but in the United States — of “undesirables” for deportation to foreign penal colonies isn’t horrific enough. Nor, apparently, is the refusal — in blatant violation of a federal court order — to bring back those who were actually legally in the country to begin with.

Now — in a revolting display of pandering to a man who, in the guise of president, has already created a worldwide economic and political conflagration that would have made Emperor Nero look like a pussycat — the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to reverse the illegal actions, and has actually extended the lower court’s ordered deadline for the deportee’s return.

I am, of course, talking about the case of Salvadoran national Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia.

Despite the fact that White House attorneys have conceded that Abrego Garcia’s deportation occurred “because of an administrative error” (and where have we heard that excuse recently?), the Justice Department (DOJ) is claiming that any such order from the Supreme Court requiring his return would be “unprecedented.”

According to Solicitor General D. John Sauer in a Supreme Court filing yesterday: “Even amidst a deluge of unlawful injunctions, this order is remarkable. The Constitution charges the president, not federal district courts, with the conduct of foreign diplomacy and protecting the nation against foreign terrorists, including by effectuating their removal. While the United States concedes that removal to El Salvador was an administrative error … that does not license district courts to seize control over foreign relations, treat the executive branch as a subordinate diplomat, and demand that the United States let a member of a foreign terrorist organization into America tonight.” [John Fritze and Devan Cole, CNN, April 7, 2025.]

Well, that certainly sounds authoritative . . . but that doesn’t make it entirely correct. And it doesn’t take an attorney, a lifelong student of the U.S. Constitution, or even a merely reasonably intelligent civilian such as myself to punch holes in that argument.

So, where to begin? How about this one: We’re not actually talking about “foreign relations” in this case, are we? There are no treaties, no trade agreements, no negotiations to end a war, no matters of dispute between our government and a second country. This is a simple case of yet another Trump administration fuck-up (don’t forget SignalGate) — this one yanking an innocent man from his family, forcing him onto a plane back to a country where his life is in jeopardy and from which he fled and received asylum in the U.S., and now refusing to bring him back because it is . . . what? . . . Difficult? Embarrassing? A bother?

Oh, and that “foreign terrorist” tag the DOJ hung on him? It’s been disproven. Abrego Garcia has lived in the United States since 2019 under a ruling by an immigration judge that he could not be deported to El Salvador because a gang there was “targeting him and threatening him with death because of his family’s pupusa business.” No connection to any terrorist organization or other gang was ever proven against him. And, for the past six years, he has regularly checked in with immigration officials, and has never been charged with a crime. So . . . another untruth. [Id.]

Third, in this case it is not the courts that are trying to “seize control over foreign relations [or] treat the executive branch as a subordinate diplomat.” On the contrary, it is the executive branch that has usurped the powers of the judiciary by repeatedly ignoring and overruling federal court orders, which seems to me a blatant violation of the separation of powers of the three branches of the U.S. government as provided in the Constitution.

In a perfect imitation of his boss, Trump adviser Stephen Miller posted on social media last week — referring to U.S. Judge Paula Xinis’ order to return Abrego Garcia to the United States:

“Marxist judge now thinks she’s president of El Salvador.” [Id.]

White House Protocol #4,378: When in doubt — and absent actual facts — just start name-calling.

And that, my fellow Americans, is the mentality of the people running our country. Or rather, running it into the ground.

But when DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni was asked under oath why Abrego Garcia couldn’t be returned to the U.S., and he didn’t have a cogent response, he said honestly:

“The first thing I did when I got this case on my desk is ask my clients the same question.” [Id.]

Not incidentally, both Reuven and his supervisor have since been placed on leave. Welcome to George Orwell’s 1984.

*. *. *.

If you had told me a year ago that this is where we would be today, I would have laughed at you. I’m not laughing now.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
4/8/25