Re: John Roberts won't save Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia

On May 25, 2025 at 3:29:19 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

May 25, 2025 at 12:15:05 PM PDT, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

May 25, 2025 at 12:26:09 AM PDT, shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>:

Sat, 24 May 2025 23:37:51 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>:

Tue, 8 Apr 2025 04:17:01 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>:

 

You do realize the guys they're going after have already had their
hearings and just ignored their deportation orders, right? Do we
need to give them another hearing about the hearing? And then maybe
a third hearing to examine the first and second hearings?

 

If the guy already has had the hearing they're entitled to, what's
left other than execution of the deportation order?

 

Perhaps he might be hauled into court to verify that the deportation
order is valid but at that point he gets cuffs and a one way trip to
either the airport or to the border right?

 

You simply don't have the right to unlimited stays of warrants. I'm
all for due process but you don't have the right to come up with a new
excuse ad infinitum.

 

Putting him into a maximum prison for life isn't exactly the same as
deporting someone.

 

He was deported to his home country. His home country had issues with
his gang affiliation and imposed punishment for it under their laws.

 

Let's not pretend the government prosecuted him with evidence they could
present in court. He was received in El Salvador then transported to
prison. There was no trial.

 

He's an El Salvadoran citizen. He came to the U.S. illegally. It's absurd
to say we can't deport him back to his own country because they don't
have the equivalent of the Bill of Rights there. Most countries in the
world don't have the same robust protection of freedoms that we have,
so using that standard, we couldn't deport anyone anywhere ever.

 
We can't deport him because an administrative law judge said so. There
cannot be a final order of deportation. This is a fact not in dispute;
even the Trump lawyer acknowledged this in court.
 
Typically, we don't honor extradition to countries who indict their
citizens for crimes that would not be crimes in the United States.

Which would be relevant if we were discussing extradition. Deportation is an
entirely different thing.

The gang participation in New York, not El Salvador, he was alleged to
have committed came from a government informant who made shit up. He
wasn't in New York. Trump administration officials repeated what the
informant said but he was never indicted nor prosecuted because the
Trump administration had no case to make.

 

Trump didn't even pretend to have evidence of crimes he may have
committed in El Salvador.

 

They've swept up massive numbers of their own citizens as criminals with
no police investigations and having gathered no evidence. Using the
crisis of out-of-control gang crimes, the government itself violated due
process and made arrests without probable cause.

 

Sure they've got laws but they aren't laws we'd recognize here.

 

Which could be said of every country in the world. Britain has laws regarding
free speech but they aren't laws we'd recognize here. They have laws
regarding
self-incrimination but they don't provide the same protections we recognize
here. Etc., etc....

 
If the UK requested extradition under such circumstances, it's illegal
for us to honor it. Yes, I understand that deportation and extradition
are not the same thing, but we actually care about such things.
 
Your claim that he's in prison because El Salvador can prove he
committed a felony is not true.

In El Salvador, apparently gang affiliation is enough to land you in stir.
That's their law and he's their citizen. Maybe he shouldn't have joined a
murderous gang if things aren't working out for him there.