—> ICE / Immigration Catch-All

[evrheel]

Are we going to deport all convicted felons to El Salvador, immigrants and US citizens alike

 

[evrheel]

in reference to

 

[superrific]

So can the people already in El Salvador file a habeas petition or is too late?

I would think so. They are still subject to US jurisdiction. I'm not sober enough to explain it well, but the 4th Circuit opinion discusses the technicalities to some degree. I don't remember all the language, but the idea was that the US is loaning them out, so to speak.

 

[Calheel]

I would think so. They are still subject to US jurisdiction. I'm not sober enough to explain it well, but the 4th Circuit opinion discusses the technicalities to some degree. I don't remember all the language, but the idea was that the US is loaning them out, so to speak.

So do they file in Texas -- the location in which they were last in US -- or can they choose a different court? The Guantanamo cases were filed in DC (although perhaps that is different because there is no district court in Cuba).

 

[superrific]

So do they file in Texas -- the location in which they were last in US -- or can they choose a different court? The Guantanamo cases were filed in DC (although perhaps that is different because there is no district court in Cuba).

I have no idea

 

[farce©]

Are we going to deport all convicted felons to El Salvador, immigrants and US citizens alike

Does that include Trump?

 

[altmin]

White House Confirms Trump Is Exploring Ways To ‘Deport’ U.S. Citizens

The administration could try removing American citizens if it identifies a pathway it can claim to be legal.

www.huffpost.com

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that President Donald Trump is exploring legal pathways to “deport” U.S. citizens to El Salvador, where the administration has already arranged to house deported immigrants in a prison known for its human rights abuses. (Watch the video, above.)

Leavitt suggested the effort would be limited to people who have committed major crimes, but Trump has also mentioned the possibility of sending people who commit lesser offenses abroad.

Any such move on the part of the Trump administration is certain to be challenged in court. It is also not clear what legal authority could be used to justify expelling U.S. citizens from their homeland.

 

[mpaer]

White House Confirms Trump Is Exploring Ways To ‘Deport’ U.S. Citizens

The administration could try removing American citizens if it identifies a pathway it can claim to be legal.

www.huffpost.com

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that President Donald Trump is exploring legal pathways to “deport” U.S. citizens to El Salvador, where the administration has already arranged to house deported immigrants in a prison known for its human rights abuses. (Watch the video, above.)

Leavitt suggested the effort would be limited to people who have committed major crimes, but Trump has also mentioned the possibility of sending people who commit lesser offenses abroad.

Any such move on the part of the Trump administration is certain to be challenged in court. It is also not clear what legal authority could be used to justify expelling U.S. citizens from their homeland.

I assumme if it happens and goes to SCOTUs they will slow walk a response

 

[nycfan]

 

[tarheelbillie]

Now that’s a picture the White House Faith Office should be really proud of .
BTW The Faith Office still has a limited quantity of the seven “supernatural blessings” for Easter season gifts of $1,000 or more. Unfortunately, trump’s “God Bless the USA Bible”, $59.99, is currently out of stock. Just wondering if God is getting his 10% cut.

 

[nycfan]

Trump Administration’s El Salvador Deportations Hit by New Legal Challenges​

Judges in Texas and New York impose temporary restraints as lawyers for Venezuelan detainees shift their strategy following U.S. Supreme Court decision​

GIFT LINK —> https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/tru...6e?st=PVTL5M&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

“Judges in New York and Texas have placed temporary guard rails on President Trump’s use of a wartime law to deport some alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador, as lawyers adapt their legal playbook to challenge the administration following a U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this week.

The American Civil Liberties Union this week has filed two lawsuits, one in Texas and another in New York, asking the courts to block the government from relocating or moving detainees jailed in those jurisdictions without at least 30 days notice and an opportunity to plead their cases.

Judges in those cases swiftly issued temporary restraining orders in their favor on Wednesday.

The order in New York applies to detainees in counties within the Southern District of New York where the case was brought.

The Texas order applies to those being held in the El Valle Detention Center, the facility where the government briefly detained dozens of Venezuelan migrants before deporting them last month to an El Salvador prison. …”

 

[nycfan]

Trump Administration’s El Salvador Deportations Hit by New Legal Challenges​

Judges in Texas and New York impose temporary restraints as lawyers for Venezuelan detainees shift their strategy following U.S. Supreme Court decision​

GIFT LINK —> https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/tru...6e?st=PVTL5M&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

“Judges in New York and Texas have placed temporary guard rails on President Trump’s use of a wartime law to deport some alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador, as lawyers adapt their legal playbook to challenge the administration following a U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this week.

The American Civil Liberties Union this week has filed two lawsuits, one in Texas and another in New York, asking the courts to block the government from relocating or moving detainees jailed in those jurisdictions without at least 30 days notice and an opportunity to plead their cases.

Judges in those cases swiftly issued temporary restraining orders in their favor on Wednesday.

The order in New York applies to detainees in counties within the Southern District of New York where the case was brought.

The Texas order applies to those being held in the El Valle Detention Center, the facility where the government briefly detained dozens of Venezuelan migrants before deporting them last month to an El Salvador prison. …”

“… The 5-4 decision [of SCOTUS] said the challenge should have been brought through the constitutional process of habeas corpus in the district where they have been held, not Washington.

However, the majority emphasized the detainees “are entitled to notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal. The only question is which court will resolve that challenge.”

…U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr, who was appointed to the Southern District of Texas bench by President Trump during his first term, said in his order Wednesday that he wanted to preserve the status quo for now while the case unfolds.

“Furthermore, if the United States erroneously removed an individual to another country based on the Proclamation, a substantial likelihood exists that the individual could not be returned to the United States,” he wrote, citing the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a man who was erroneously deported last month to his home country of El Salvador, where he has been imprisoned.

The Trump administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block a lower court order directing it to bring Abrego Garcia back. …”

 

[Zoo_View]

So, has the Trump Administration stopped deporting people without due process; or, is the Trump Administration continuing to do so?

I have my doubts that the court(s) have stopped anything.

 

[mpaer]

So, has the Trump Administration stopped deporting people without due process; or, is the Trump Administration continuing to do so?

I have my doubts that the court(s) have stopped anything.

SCOTUs has some concerns about process -and no

 

[heelinhell]

Will SCOTUS nix the deportation of American citizens ?

Karoline Leavitt primed unthinkable action after Sonia Sotomayor's warning: analyst

MSNBC’S Jordan Rubin delivered a message to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt after she floated the startling suggestion that the U.S. government could potentially deport American citizens who are “violent” repeat offenders “if it’s legal.”“It’s not,” the legal analyst Rubin clapped...

www.rawstory.com

 

[nycfan]

 

[nycfan]

There are others who probably also deserve to get out of the hellhole ASAP, but a start.

 

[nycfan]

SCOTUS seems to be adopting the more circumscribed approach of the most conservative opinion from the DC 4th Circuit. The notion that “facilitating” the return of Abrego Garcia is more clear than “effectuating” his return is … puzzling and lacking any direction as to the distinction or what constitutes sufficient effort to facilitate his return. It creates the need for further hearings before the facilitation can be ordered. Then what? Back up to DC Circuit and SCOTUS to sort out the meaning of facilitation, right?

 

[mpaer]

SCOTUS seems to be adopting the more circumscribed approach of the most conservative opinion from the DC Circuit. The notion that “facilitating” the return of Abrego Garcia is more clear than “effectuating” his return is … puzzling and lacking any direction as to the distinction or what constitutes sufficient effort to facilitate his return. It creates the need for further hearings before the facilitation can be ordered. Then what? Back up to DC Circuit and SCOTUS to sort out the meaning of facilitation, right?

Kick the can..............

 

[superrific]

SCOTUS seems to be adopting the more circumscribed approach of the most conservative opinion from the DC Circuit. The notion that “facilitating” the return of Abrego Garcia is more clear than “effectuating” his return is … puzzling and lacking any direction as to the distinction or what constitutes sufficient effort to facilitate his return. It creates the need for further hearings before the facilitation can be ordered. Then what? Back up to DC Circuit and SCOTUS to sort out the meaning of facilitation, right?

FYI the court below was 4th Circuit. I know, it's hard to keep track of everything.

I'm on board with this. I'm OK with facilitating. Notice that the Court didn't say that the effectuate language had to be eliminated; it merely had to be clarified. And as Wilkinson wrote in the concurrence you're referring to, the distinction between facilitate and effectuate might be more apparent than real. Anyway, I would not want the Supreme Court to commit to anything broad on the shadow docket. What "effectuating" would mean in this context shouldn't be decided in a lightning fast emergency posture.

Roberts did require the government to tell the court what steps it has taken and future steps. So that leaves open at least some enforcement.

The bigger takeaway, though, is what the Supreme Court is signaling to other district and appeals courts: basically, we're not going to just rubber stamp this administration. We've got your back, at least a little bit. Maybe not a lot, but district courts can now act more confidently.

Also, another interesting twist: no statement from Alito or Thomas. The liberals offered a statement, which basically said, "eh we agree with the outcome but we would have preferred to just deny the application." And none of the conservatives offered any counterpoint. I don't know if we should conclude from that that Alito and Thomas are fully on board, but Alito in particular has difficulty restraining himself when any of the liberals offers a dissenting view. The fact that he said nothing seems like a pretty good sign, if not strongly indicative