I'd care. As H. L. Mencken said:
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
What exactly it means to facilitate is part of what the court is considering. From the Vox article:
The Supreme Court concludes that the lower court’s order “properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador...
But it adds that the “intended scope of the term ‘effectuate’ in the District Court’s order” — to “facilitate and effectuate his return — “is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority.” The word “facilitate” suggests that the government must take what steps it can to make something happen, while the word “effectuate” suggests that it needs to actually make it happen.
I visited Taipei and I was surprised to see no free-standing single-story homes even relatively far from the city center. People lived in row-houses four or five stories tall, and the first floor of pretty much every single one of these houses was occupied by a small store or restaurant. Many streets were very narrow and mopeds were common but cars less so. It was much livelier there than in a US suburb (or even many US city centers) and I enjoyed my tourist experience. Still, I would prefer to live in a quieter, less dense American-style suburb and drive if I needed to do anything except enjoy my property, but I can see why many people would prefer the opposite. I think it might be like being an introvert or extrovert.
Meeting people. Reading books. Working. I'm not exactly improving with age...
No, it's feminizing.
So, do I sell because he'll keep wrecking the economy, or do I hold because he'll keep backing down? What do the licensed financial advisors here, acting in their professional capacity and accepting full legal responsibility for the consequences, think?
Challenging them is one thing. Disrupting the CEO's public speech is another. I think almost every company would fire any employee who did that for any reason.
Her posts are extremely mild. Is singling her out a publicity stunt?
Don't we all want to hide how ugly we are?
I think that would be beyond the authority of the court, although exactly where the court's authority ends is unclear. It doesn't get to dictate foreign policy, so I expect that it can order the executive branch to do things consistent with the current foreign policy towards El Salvador (like asking for him back) but it cannot order the executive branch to dramatically change that foreign policy (by imposing tariffs).
The problem I foresee is that Trump can make an official request but also say that he would be happier if the request was not granted. (Something along the lines of "Please return this horrible criminal, who I never want to have in America again, because the court is ordering me to ask you against my will, and keep in mind that if you say no then I won't force you to do anything and in fact I'll like you better," which I don't think is much of an exaggeration given Trump's lack of subtlety.) If El Salvador then does not grant the request, I'm not sure what the court could do.