this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2025
268 points (99.6% liked)

politics

22813 readers
3094 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://midwest.social/post/25857740

This is INSANE! Trump is asking the Supreme Court to bless his administration screwing up TO THE POINT THEY CEEDED CUSTODY OF A PERSON THEY DIDN’T HAVE LEGAL CUSTODY OVER and not require them to fix it?

If SCOTUS backs Trump here, literally all is lost. Due process will have NO MEANING if this isn’t fixed ASAP.

Remember, if they did it to this guy the only thing stopping them from doing it to you or me is dumb luck.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 37 points 5 days ago (11 children)

This shit is going down today. There are three possibilities:

  1. Supreme Court grants a stay, ignoring the rule of law, and hastening the slide to authoritarianism.
  2. No stay, and the government hustles to get this man back to the US by midnight tonight. I'd guess it's like 6-8 hours of flying just to get to El Salvador and back, so the clock is really ticking on this option.
  3. No stay, and the deadline expires. The government will clearly be in continuous and ongoing contempt of court.

If they don't get a stay and they make some kind of half hearted "bad man Bukele won't cooperate" argument, I don't think Xinis will buy that, and they'll be back to #3.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 days ago (6 children)

they make some kind of half hearted “bad man Bukele won’t cooperate” argument

That's not half-hearted. It's a very, very real possibility especially if Bukele wants to cozy up to Trump and give him an out.

"Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador and is currently in our custody awaiting trial on criminal charges for crimes he committed before he fled the country to escape justice. He will remain in the custody of El Salvador until he is tried for those charges and any sentence imposed on him has been completed. He will not be sent back to the United States."

From there, Trump can easily make a "good faith" argument that he tried to have the citizen returned but was unable to secure his release. His MAGA base will eat it up, and it's very likely that the Supreme Court would dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and lack of enforcement mechanism. Even if they don't, any ruling would be a symbolic gesture at best and carry as much practical weight as me making the same demands from my front porch.

Remember, El Salvador has absolutely no reason to send this guy back. Bukele is under no circumstances going to defy Trump's wishes when he's actively trying to cozy up to Trump. If anything, he's only going to run cover for Trump.

We don't have to like it, but that's the reality of the situation. There is no method of enforcement. If El Salvador is unwilling to send him back, he's staying there. And the Supreme Court could very well recognize that reality. They could easily vote 9-0 that Trump was in the wrong but dismiss Xinis' order anyway due to it being unenforceable.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Has Bukele said this? Has the administration made any attempt to return him?

It is possible that they will stonewall, but it is important to force them to do so rather than obeying in advance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

No, he has not said that, and I agree that it's important to get it on the record for a variety of reasons.

I'm just saying that there is a very likely possibility of this being the end result, even if only so Bukele can cozy up to Trump, and that if he does say this, the geopolitical reality of the situation is that it would essentially be the end of the case.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)