The Trump administration’s insistence on ensuring Abrego Garcia does not return to the U.S is an indication that perhaps the U.S. is funding something like a concentration camp in El Salvador and they are eager to cover that up.
What?! So, the US is funding a concentration camp to exterminate people?
This is insane and destroys all credibility for your "reporting" when it's not an "editorial."
By the comments I've seen, some people think they are actually getting news here. No one should think that. This blog is as biased and as agenda-driven as they come.
And if anyone else made such a horrific, evil and unfounded accusation, the comment would be removed.
The comment by Wendy does not violate the policy here, just to correct your statement, because it refers to her opinion about what the government’s motivation is. Your comment is borderline, because it veers closely to a personal attack. Please keep the discourse polite and respectful as per the comments policy. I should add that no one is forced to read the Chronicle, although the publication reflects a wide variety of viewpoints in Croton and not everyone is going to agree with all of them. I have invited readers over and again to submit Guest Editorials of their own.
Yes, she makes her points well. Lately there has been a significant increase in Guest Editorials in the Chronicle, part of turning it into a real community publication that reflects the wide variety of viewpoints in the community. It makes a nice balance with the more hard-core reporting.
Thanks for this detailed run-down of Abrego Garcia's case. For those who think the Trump administration is justified, remember this case is not just about one man -- and it would be enough if it were -- but it's actually a precedent-setting series of events with broad and frightening implications for all of us. We all heard Trump say he wants five more prisons in El Salvador, reserved for "homegrowns" -- U.S. citizens he deems criminals who could be snatched off the streets with no due process. Abrego Garcia is the test balloon to see if we will tolerate this. With no respect for the courts, who can limit what Trump considers "dangerous?" His definition of "homegrown" could and will easily include those with opposing political views, those who have exercised free speech in nonviolent protest, those who have written Op-Eds, those who are transgender, those suspected of vandalizing a Tesla, those who have abortions...the list goes on, and it includes all of us.
Just a comment from me here. Like many of the topics we cover or publish Guest Editorials about, this one is controversial. In this case the piece is clearly marked opinion, and at the end of it we invite others to submit Guest Editorial ideas of their own. The posts in the Chronicle are as diverse as the community it serves, so of course not everyone is going to like every article. Attacking the publication, its editor, or the guest contributors does not change any of that.
" in almost all cases, we would not bring an undocumented immigrant back to the U.S. after they were deported for committing a crime—especially if they were here illegally in the first place."
ChatGPT is not an expert in the law. The U.S. Supreme Court is. They ruled 9-0 that Abrego Garcia should be brought back to the U.S., from which the government admits he was mistakenly deported, so that he can have due process and make his case about whether or not he is a criminal or a gang member (there are reasons to think he might not be, but it doesn’t matter he has the right to make his case.) It’s really that simple. I think the US Supreme Court and not ChatGPT is the expert here. Please study up on the case because a lot of people just have it wrong and/or don’t understand it.
PS—Everyone is entitled to their opinion but there is also a responsibility to correct errors of fact in the course of these discussions. A lot of people, unfortunately, have simply got the facts of the Abrego Garcia case wrong and don’t seem to understand the legal issues currently at play.
Yes, the term “facilitate” obviously can be open to interpretation. But the government’s position is that it does not have to do anything at all, which is a clear violation of what the courts are saying.
No, this is wrong and misleading. The government's position is that it CAN'T do anything. Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador and is in his home country. The US government has no authority over him. He is not and never was a US citizen. The Supreme Court has NO authority over him or El Salvador. It is really that simple. I'm not sure why people don't get it or don't want to get it.
I know this point is inconvenient and making it yesterday got me banned for 24 hours. But the truth is not always convenient.
This is going to be my last comment to you. Today, the court of appeals for the fourth circuit ruled in such a way that completely contradicts what you’re saying. Your comment is factually, incorrect legally incorrect you are spreading misinformation on this page and it needs to stop really
Here is what I want you to do. I want you to read this decision from the appeal court today because you seem to be uninformed about it. It completely contradicts what you’re saying and it is the latest legal decision that appears on this case. It was also written by a very conservative judge. https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/42698931654973a1/2eba7934-full.pdf
Not all of the guest editorials are about national news. There are quite a few that are about Croton related issues. and sorry, there is no way, just don’t read the pieces you don’t want to read!
Subscribe to a non-partisan, true journalistic village news site, and suddenly find yourself in a MSNBC echo-chamber, with President Donald J. Hitler running concentration camps and executing people in foreign countries!
The Chronicle provides a mix of straight reporting, especially about village affairs, with Guest Editorials expressing a wide variety of opinions. That should be obvious to all and I think is obvious. No one is forced to read it or to subscribe to it.
Yeah, my first comment is a little ball busting, but it’s true that we are bombarded with liberal thought and influence through the majority of media and it was nice when this specific outlet was a break from that and purely local-oriented.
Perhaps there are better options out there for a “deportee defense” than someone with alleged MS13 connections and document domestic abuse history (and it goes without saying that he is here illegally from the start).
The Chronicle has featured Guest Editorials on subjects beyond Croton for many months on many subjects, and the Guest Editorial slot is open to all viewpoints in the village. In fact, of all the articles this past week, this was the ONLY one that was not about Croton. As I have said before, no one is forced to read the Chronicle or every article in it, and the editorial policy is unlikely to change. As for Abrego Garcia, U.S. courts on the district, appeals, and Supreme levels have all ruled that he has the right to due process in the United States as a matter of basic constitutional law, and they have ordered the Trump administration to do what it can to bring him back. That is the primary issue in his case at this moment and that is where things stand legally; the district judge is now exploring whether the Trump administration has violated the court’s orders. I suggest reading the Fourth Circuit decision if you have not already.
You don’t have to defend it. It’s your publication and you can do as you wish, just as someone can simply ignore those articles. It just seems like most of the national oriented articles are slanted towards a certain political viewpoint and with intention.
Look, you are among many who have been loyal subscribers and supported the publication. So I do think I should explain (not defend) the editorial policies. I have asked Trump supporters in Croton over and over and over again to submit Guest Editorials expressing their viewpoints, and every Guest Editorial includes such an invitation and how to get in touch. Not one person of that political persuasion has done it. I won’t speculate about why, even if I might have my personal thoughts about it. So what you see as a political slant is not intentional, even if my personal politics are no secret. I would very happily publish a well written defense of Trump policies. Maybe you would like to write one?
As always, I have a lot of appreciation for this publication in terms of the local news and information offered that is not available elsewhere. It’s obvious the research that is involved in your local news and at times I understand it can be a thankless job.
To me, there is no onus on Trump supporters (and I’m certainly not a diehard Trumper) to need to write anything. Personally, it’s not worth my time and effort to try to convince strangers of anything regarding him. Heck, we may have someone from Croton lose their job because of federal cutbacks. To that person, he is hurtful. But I’m also in the mindset that doing a better job on our borders (just one policy example) and deporting some of the more dangerous illegals may honestly save some lives. If not directly from preventing violence, indirectly from some of the drug distribution that will be prevented. Could any of that trickle down to a Croton citizen? Perhaps, who knows? I see it much more of a national benefit to have him in, or at least better than the alternative that was offered.
I think both parties need to do a lot better. It’s way too extreme on both ends. It’s insane that a multi-billionaire came across as the more relatable candidate, but he did to the majority of the American people. Even Bill Maher recently admitted that, on a personal level. The republicans actually come across as more real. Some might hate what they do or stand for, but they unapologetically do what they say. The current democrats, with the media in their back pocket, are like the party of gas lighting and smoke and mirrors. They have no identity, little connection to their base and are very much “do as I say, not as I do” mentality.
Well, of course this account is extremely biased and skewed. This represents only one side of the argument and is meant to scare people to an extreme. "Your own government is going to snatch up innocent law-abiding citizens and ship them to foreign prisons!"
For those not following the case, the government contends that this illegal immigrant is a dangerous member of MS-13, who should NOT be in this country. He is back in his home country. While they acknowledge an "administrative error" for his deportation at that time, that would have been the final outcome anyway. Furthermore, the Supreme Court ruling is nuanced, and the government argues that they are following the ruling. There is too much to elaborate on here, but I'd encourage folks to read the Attorney General and Secretary of State's comments on this case.
But I have an EASY SOLUTION! Show us his tattoos! Why are they so hard to find? MS-13 members are clearly marked and wear their tattoos proudly. They are not meant to be subtle or secret. Is he a member of MS-13 or not? I read that his wife had identified him in prison from his head scars and tattoos. Where are these pictures?
While I know many extreme people will think this is irrelevant, I think this point will be important to most moderate Americans. For me personally, I will have a real concern if we sent someone who is "only" here illegally or a petty criminal to that hardcore prison in El Salvador. I want to know.
Maybe the journalists at the Croton Chronical can find out?
But the links are as biased as the article itself. When a piece starts by calling the government's argument "dubious," you know you are not getting a balanced account.
I'd encourage everyone to read as many sources as possible and get balance.
One thing I did learn from the link, was that he actually got married while incarcerated. They even exchanged rings using a jail guard. I did not know that previously.
But again, I'd say let's not quiver over biased accounts, let's see the tattoos for ourselves. Has anyone seen them? You will immediately know if he is MS-13 or not.
My first comment here would be that experts on gangs and tattoos take issue with the contention that they are definitive in determining whether someone is a member of a gang. So you might want to extend your research into that area. That’s just for starters; even if someone might have been a gang member when they were younger does not necessarily mean they continued to be one, despite any tattoos etc. But the main point is that he has the right to challenge the basis of his deportation, challenge the government’s contention that he was a gang member, etc. That is due process, he is being denied it, and that is what this case is about right now. That is what the courts are dealing with at the moment.
But I would argue that whether he is a MS-13 member or not, is very relevant. The government's argument is based on that fact.
My point is that it is very easy to clear him in the court of public opinion, at least, by showing his tattoos. If he is (or was) a member of MS-13, we'll know it pretty quickly. Those tats are distinct and clear.
It's a good strategy if you want more people on your side. A good move for him and his family.
This will be my last response on this point. That is not what is issue in the case right now. He is not being given the opportunity to show his tattoos, present other evidence that he is not a gang member, or anything like that, because he is in a prison in El Salvador and the Trump administration is not allowing him to come back. You seem to be missing that entire issue which is before the courts right now and is a fundamental question of due process. I have now said this about three times but it does not seem to be registering. The Trump administration has repeatedly lost in the courts on that issue but still refuses to bring him back. Please try to understand the legal issues in the current court cases.
The government is arguing that they are following the court order within their control. They will "facilitate" his return, per the SCOTUS order, by sending a plane should he be returned. They would then process him as a member of this foreign terrorist organization and return him to the prison.
But he is actually a citizen of El Salvador and now back in El Salvador. El Salvador has jurisdiction over its own citizens. The president of El Salvador himself said he would NOT return a dangerous, gang member into the United States.
We have 3 separate, "but equal" branches of government.
While they argue over these points and make the necessary legal moves, I wonder is this guy really a MS-13 member?
If not, how could he and his supports help his case? How can he grow support and refute the government's argument in the media and in public opinion. Pretty simple argument really.
I’m curious whether you agree or not that the most relevant issues are that not only was this many denied his 5th amendment rights of due process but he was also deported to a prison that is infamous for its human rights abuses. And that we are paying $6million to keep immigrants imprisoned there.
Well, I'm not a lawyer, but I'd argue that if he is a member of a foreign terrorist organization (as MS-13 is classified), and in our country illegally, his rights are questionable. He certainly doesn't have a right to the 2nd Amendment nor the right to vote in federal elections. I suppose his due process would be similar to that of other foreign terrorists. Certainly, not that of an American citizen.
Again, this is why his ties to MS-13 are so relevant.
Does the U.S. Supreme Court have TDS? Because it ruled against the government 9-0 in this case. Everyone is welcome to make comments in this space that adhere to the Comments policy, but raising the level of the discussion is always welcome.
Funding and covering up a concentration camp in El Salvador to exterminate people is truly off the wall and the thought can only be justified by knowing the depth of the TDS by the left. Truly off the wall comments!
Due process is a foundational element of our democracy. To those who think the government has the right to take people off the streets and send them to a gulag far from our shores without due process , think about the fact that any one of us- you-could be next.
Did the American people have do process when the Biden administration allowed thousands of illegal immigrants into this country? Yes, thay did during the November 2024 general election when they overwhelmingly elected Presdent Trump. He is now trying to accomplish what he said he would and this has the left in a tizzy. There wasn't a peep from the left when Biden was flagrently breaking immigration law!
Well isn't the USA in a fine mess. The President has no respect for the rule of law or the Courts. The people coming into this Country has no respect for our laws that generations of immigrants have follow for centuries. So where does that leave us. This is a Country of laws to be followed by the President and those who wish to come here for a better life. I don't care if you are from Ireland or El Salvador you know whether you came here the right way or the wrong way. The right way have no fear but the wrong way leave and turn around and come back according to the laws of this Country.
The Trump administration’s insistence on ensuring Abrego Garcia does not return to the U.S is an indication that perhaps the U.S. is funding something like a concentration camp in El Salvador and they are eager to cover that up.
Speaking personally I think that is likely part of the motivation. “Dead men tell no tales.”
What?! So, the US is funding a concentration camp to exterminate people?
This is insane and destroys all credibility for your "reporting" when it's not an "editorial."
By the comments I've seen, some people think they are actually getting news here. No one should think that. This blog is as biased and as agenda-driven as they come.
And if anyone else made such a horrific, evil and unfounded accusation, the comment would be removed.
The comment by Wendy does not violate the policy here, just to correct your statement, because it refers to her opinion about what the government’s motivation is. Your comment is borderline, because it veers closely to a personal attack. Please keep the discourse polite and respectful as per the comments policy. I should add that no one is forced to read the Chronicle, although the publication reflects a wide variety of viewpoints in Croton and not everyone is going to agree with all of them. I have invited readers over and again to submit Guest Editorials of their own.
Excellent piece. I look forward to reading more from Holtzman.
Yes, she makes her points well. Lately there has been a significant increase in Guest Editorials in the Chronicle, part of turning it into a real community publication that reflects the wide variety of viewpoints in the community. It makes a nice balance with the more hard-core reporting.
Thanks for this detailed run-down of Abrego Garcia's case. For those who think the Trump administration is justified, remember this case is not just about one man -- and it would be enough if it were -- but it's actually a precedent-setting series of events with broad and frightening implications for all of us. We all heard Trump say he wants five more prisons in El Salvador, reserved for "homegrowns" -- U.S. citizens he deems criminals who could be snatched off the streets with no due process. Abrego Garcia is the test balloon to see if we will tolerate this. With no respect for the courts, who can limit what Trump considers "dangerous?" His definition of "homegrown" could and will easily include those with opposing political views, those who have exercised free speech in nonviolent protest, those who have written Op-Eds, those who are transgender, those suspected of vandalizing a Tesla, those who have abortions...the list goes on, and it includes all of us.
Some comments were deleted that were completely off-topic for this post.
A ruling just this afternoon by the US court of appeal for the fourth circuit is extremely relevant to the conversation we’ve been having here. I would urge people to read it. https://abcnews.go.com/US/slamming-trump-administration-appeals-court-denies-request-appeal/story?id=120921685
Just a comment from me here. Like many of the topics we cover or publish Guest Editorials about, this one is controversial. In this case the piece is clearly marked opinion, and at the end of it we invite others to submit Guest Editorial ideas of their own. The posts in the Chronicle are as diverse as the community it serves, so of course not everyone is going to like every article. Attacking the publication, its editor, or the guest contributors does not change any of that.
I asked chatgpt - this is what it said -
" in almost all cases, we would not bring an undocumented immigrant back to the U.S. after they were deported for committing a crime—especially if they were here illegally in the first place."
Then it went on to explain how it works....
ChatGPT is not an expert in the law. The U.S. Supreme Court is. They ruled 9-0 that Abrego Garcia should be brought back to the U.S., from which the government admits he was mistakenly deported, so that he can have due process and make his case about whether or not he is a criminal or a gang member (there are reasons to think he might not be, but it doesn’t matter he has the right to make his case.) It’s really that simple. I think the US Supreme Court and not ChatGPT is the expert here. Please study up on the case because a lot of people just have it wrong and/or don’t understand it.
PS—Everyone is entitled to their opinion but there is also a responsibility to correct errors of fact in the course of these discussions. A lot of people, unfortunately, have simply got the facts of the Abrego Garcia case wrong and don’t seem to understand the legal issues currently at play.
Just passing along what AI said... It will be interesting to see what develops. A lot of definitions of the word, 'facilitate', I imagine.
Yes, the term “facilitate” obviously can be open to interpretation. But the government’s position is that it does not have to do anything at all, which is a clear violation of what the courts are saying.
I should add that the District Court judge in the case is not accepting the government’s definition of the word by any means
No, this is wrong and misleading. The government's position is that it CAN'T do anything. Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador and is in his home country. The US government has no authority over him. He is not and never was a US citizen. The Supreme Court has NO authority over him or El Salvador. It is really that simple. I'm not sure why people don't get it or don't want to get it.
I know this point is inconvenient and making it yesterday got me banned for 24 hours. But the truth is not always convenient.
This is going to be my last comment to you. Today, the court of appeals for the fourth circuit ruled in such a way that completely contradicts what you’re saying. Your comment is factually, incorrect legally incorrect you are spreading misinformation on this page and it needs to stop really
Here is what I want you to do. I want you to read this decision from the appeal court today because you seem to be uninformed about it. It completely contradicts what you’re saying and it is the latest legal decision that appears on this case. It was also written by a very conservative judge. https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/42698931654973a1/2eba7934-full.pdf
Is there a way in which I don’t have to see the editorials which are national news and agenda-driven? I’d rather just see Croton news.
Not all of the guest editorials are about national news. There are quite a few that are about Croton related issues. and sorry, there is no way, just don’t read the pieces you don’t want to read!
It's a bit of a bait and switch, right?
Subscribe to a non-partisan, true journalistic village news site, and suddenly find yourself in a MSNBC echo-chamber, with President Donald J. Hitler running concentration camps and executing people in foreign countries!
Why not just promote it for what it is?
The Chronicle provides a mix of straight reporting, especially about village affairs, with Guest Editorials expressing a wide variety of opinions. That should be obvious to all and I think is obvious. No one is forced to read it or to subscribe to it.
Yeah, my first comment is a little ball busting, but it’s true that we are bombarded with liberal thought and influence through the majority of media and it was nice when this specific outlet was a break from that and purely local-oriented.
Perhaps there are better options out there for a “deportee defense” than someone with alleged MS13 connections and document domestic abuse history (and it goes without saying that he is here illegally from the start).
The Chronicle has featured Guest Editorials on subjects beyond Croton for many months on many subjects, and the Guest Editorial slot is open to all viewpoints in the village. In fact, of all the articles this past week, this was the ONLY one that was not about Croton. As I have said before, no one is forced to read the Chronicle or every article in it, and the editorial policy is unlikely to change. As for Abrego Garcia, U.S. courts on the district, appeals, and Supreme levels have all ruled that he has the right to due process in the United States as a matter of basic constitutional law, and they have ordered the Trump administration to do what it can to bring him back. That is the primary issue in his case at this moment and that is where things stand legally; the district judge is now exploring whether the Trump administration has violated the court’s orders. I suggest reading the Fourth Circuit decision if you have not already.
You don’t have to defend it. It’s your publication and you can do as you wish, just as someone can simply ignore those articles. It just seems like most of the national oriented articles are slanted towards a certain political viewpoint and with intention.
Look, you are among many who have been loyal subscribers and supported the publication. So I do think I should explain (not defend) the editorial policies. I have asked Trump supporters in Croton over and over and over again to submit Guest Editorials expressing their viewpoints, and every Guest Editorial includes such an invitation and how to get in touch. Not one person of that political persuasion has done it. I won’t speculate about why, even if I might have my personal thoughts about it. So what you see as a political slant is not intentional, even if my personal politics are no secret. I would very happily publish a well written defense of Trump policies. Maybe you would like to write one?
As always, I have a lot of appreciation for this publication in terms of the local news and information offered that is not available elsewhere. It’s obvious the research that is involved in your local news and at times I understand it can be a thankless job.
To me, there is no onus on Trump supporters (and I’m certainly not a diehard Trumper) to need to write anything. Personally, it’s not worth my time and effort to try to convince strangers of anything regarding him. Heck, we may have someone from Croton lose their job because of federal cutbacks. To that person, he is hurtful. But I’m also in the mindset that doing a better job on our borders (just one policy example) and deporting some of the more dangerous illegals may honestly save some lives. If not directly from preventing violence, indirectly from some of the drug distribution that will be prevented. Could any of that trickle down to a Croton citizen? Perhaps, who knows? I see it much more of a national benefit to have him in, or at least better than the alternative that was offered.
I think both parties need to do a lot better. It’s way too extreme on both ends. It’s insane that a multi-billionaire came across as the more relatable candidate, but he did to the majority of the American people. Even Bill Maher recently admitted that, on a personal level. The republicans actually come across as more real. Some might hate what they do or stand for, but they unapologetically do what they say. The current democrats, with the media in their back pocket, are like the party of gas lighting and smoke and mirrors. They have no identity, little connection to their base and are very much “do as I say, not as I do” mentality.
Well, of course this account is extremely biased and skewed. This represents only one side of the argument and is meant to scare people to an extreme. "Your own government is going to snatch up innocent law-abiding citizens and ship them to foreign prisons!"
For those not following the case, the government contends that this illegal immigrant is a dangerous member of MS-13, who should NOT be in this country. He is back in his home country. While they acknowledge an "administrative error" for his deportation at that time, that would have been the final outcome anyway. Furthermore, the Supreme Court ruling is nuanced, and the government argues that they are following the ruling. There is too much to elaborate on here, but I'd encourage folks to read the Attorney General and Secretary of State's comments on this case.
But I have an EASY SOLUTION! Show us his tattoos! Why are they so hard to find? MS-13 members are clearly marked and wear their tattoos proudly. They are not meant to be subtle or secret. Is he a member of MS-13 or not? I read that his wife had identified him in prison from his head scars and tattoos. Where are these pictures?
While I know many extreme people will think this is irrelevant, I think this point will be important to most moderate Americans. For me personally, I will have a real concern if we sent someone who is "only" here illegally or a petty criminal to that hardcore prison in El Salvador. I want to know.
Maybe the journalists at the Croton Chronical can find out?
I suggest reading ALL of the links in the piece which address nearly all of these questions.
But the links are as biased as the article itself. When a piece starts by calling the government's argument "dubious," you know you are not getting a balanced account.
I'd encourage everyone to read as many sources as possible and get balance.
One thing I did learn from the link, was that he actually got married while incarcerated. They even exchanged rings using a jail guard. I did not know that previously.
But again, I'd say let's not quiver over biased accounts, let's see the tattoos for ourselves. Has anyone seen them? You will immediately know if he is MS-13 or not.
My first comment here would be that experts on gangs and tattoos take issue with the contention that they are definitive in determining whether someone is a member of a gang. So you might want to extend your research into that area. That’s just for starters; even if someone might have been a gang member when they were younger does not necessarily mean they continued to be one, despite any tattoos etc. But the main point is that he has the right to challenge the basis of his deportation, challenge the government’s contention that he was a gang member, etc. That is due process, he is being denied it, and that is what this case is about right now. That is what the courts are dealing with at the moment.
But I would argue that whether he is a MS-13 member or not, is very relevant. The government's argument is based on that fact.
My point is that it is very easy to clear him in the court of public opinion, at least, by showing his tattoos. If he is (or was) a member of MS-13, we'll know it pretty quickly. Those tats are distinct and clear.
It's a good strategy if you want more people on your side. A good move for him and his family.
Unless of course they ARE MS13 tattoos...
This will be my last response on this point. That is not what is issue in the case right now. He is not being given the opportunity to show his tattoos, present other evidence that he is not a gang member, or anything like that, because he is in a prison in El Salvador and the Trump administration is not allowing him to come back. You seem to be missing that entire issue which is before the courts right now and is a fundamental question of due process. I have now said this about three times but it does not seem to be registering. The Trump administration has repeatedly lost in the courts on that issue but still refuses to bring him back. Please try to understand the legal issues in the current court cases.
But you continue to miss my point.
The government is arguing that they are following the court order within their control. They will "facilitate" his return, per the SCOTUS order, by sending a plane should he be returned. They would then process him as a member of this foreign terrorist organization and return him to the prison.
But he is actually a citizen of El Salvador and now back in El Salvador. El Salvador has jurisdiction over its own citizens. The president of El Salvador himself said he would NOT return a dangerous, gang member into the United States.
We have 3 separate, "but equal" branches of government.
While they argue over these points and make the necessary legal moves, I wonder is this guy really a MS-13 member?
If not, how could he and his supports help his case? How can he grow support and refute the government's argument in the media and in public opinion. Pretty simple argument really.
I’m curious whether you agree or not that the most relevant issues are that not only was this many denied his 5th amendment rights of due process but he was also deported to a prison that is infamous for its human rights abuses. And that we are paying $6million to keep immigrants imprisoned there.
Well, I'm not a lawyer, but I'd argue that if he is a member of a foreign terrorist organization (as MS-13 is classified), and in our country illegally, his rights are questionable. He certainly doesn't have a right to the 2nd Amendment nor the right to vote in federal elections. I suppose his due process would be similar to that of other foreign terrorists. Certainly, not that of an American citizen.
Again, this is why his ties to MS-13 are so relevant.
It is not really about Kilmar Abrego Garcia! Just another manifestation of TDS
Does the U.S. Supreme Court have TDS? Because it ruled against the government 9-0 in this case. Everyone is welcome to make comments in this space that adhere to the Comments policy, but raising the level of the discussion is always welcome.
The U.S. Supreme Court does not have TDS, but take President Trump out of this discussion and nobody would have heard of Kilmar Abrego Garcia!
Funding and covering up a concentration camp in El Salvador to exterminate people is truly off the wall and the thought can only be justified by knowing the depth of the TDS by the left. Truly off the wall comments!
Due process is a foundational element of our democracy. To those who think the government has the right to take people off the streets and send them to a gulag far from our shores without due process , think about the fact that any one of us- you-could be next.
Did the American people have do process when the Biden administration allowed thousands of illegal immigrants into this country? Yes, thay did during the November 2024 general election when they overwhelmingly elected Presdent Trump. He is now trying to accomplish what he said he would and this has the left in a tizzy. There wasn't a peep from the left when Biden was flagrently breaking immigration law!
Well isn't the USA in a fine mess. The President has no respect for the rule of law or the Courts. The people coming into this Country has no respect for our laws that generations of immigrants have follow for centuries. So where does that leave us. This is a Country of laws to be followed by the President and those who wish to come here for a better life. I don't care if you are from Ireland or El Salvador you know whether you came here the right way or the wrong way. The right way have no fear but the wrong way leave and turn around and come back according to the laws of this Country.