The Trump administration is exploring the illegal deportation of U.S. citizens to El Salvador, potentially using denaturalization as a pretext. This follows previous actions such as deporting green card holders for pro-Palestinian views and sending migrants to a Salvadoran prison without due process. Legal experts overwhelmingly agree that such actions violate both U.S. and international law, characterizing them as shockingly authoritarian. Despite a Supreme Court order to return a wrongfully deported individual, the administration shows no signs of compliance, further highlighting its disregard for legal procedure.
Read More
The Trump administration, despite a Supreme Court order, continues to resist efforts to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a U.S. citizen wrongly deported to El Salvador. While claiming Abrego Garcia is “alive and secure” in El Salvador, the administration asserts a lack of jurisdiction to intervene, citing Salvadoran sovereignty. President Trump’s statement on Truth Social further suggests the U.S. considers the matter resolved, leaving Abrego Garcia’s fate to El Salvador. This stance follows a motion filed by Abrego Garcia’s attorneys to hold the administration in contempt for non-compliance with the court order.
Read More
A Louisiana immigration judge ruled that Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Palestinian activist, can be deported, upholding Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s determination that Khalil’s activities threaten U.S. foreign policy goals. Rubio cited the McCarran-Walter Act, which allows the secretary of state to deport non-citizens whose presence undermines national interests, in making his decision. While the judge lacked authority to question Rubio’s assessment, Khalil’s attorneys plan to appeal the ruling and request a stay of deportation. Deportation could send Khalil to either Syria or Algeria.
Read More
Facing a deportation order, the federal government, instead of providing evidence against Columbia University activist Mahmoud Khalil, submitted a memo signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The memo argues Khalil’s expulsion is justified because his lawful activism, while not criminal, undermines U.S. foreign policy objectives by combating antisemitism. Khalil’s lawyers contend this demonstrates the administration is targeting his free speech rights. The government’s failure to provide additional evidence despite a court order further supports this claim, as does the memo’s mention of a second, unnamed individual facing similar deportation.
Read More
U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis expressed deep concern over the Trump administration’s failure to comply with a court order mandating the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant erroneously deported to El Salvador. Despite a Supreme Court ruling upholding the order to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return, the administration failed to provide his location or details of their efforts. The judge demanded daily updates, even if only to acknowledge the ongoing process, while the administration argued that foreign affairs cannot operate on judicial timelines. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers countered that the government’s actions constitute a delay tactic endangering their client’s safety.
Read More
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal authorities must “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man mistakenly deported, issuing a rebuke of the Trump administration’s actions. While the Court’s order scaled back a lower court’s mandate, concerns remain about the ambiguity of “facilitate,” potentially leaving Garcia in limbo given the administration’s claims of lacking control over El Salvadorian prisons. This decision highlights a growing divide between the Supreme Court and the Trump administration, exemplified by recent dissent from Justice Barrett against Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act. The ruling underscores the Court’s willingness to check the executive branch, even as it navigates the complexities of international repatriation.
Read More
Jonathan, an Australian with a valid US work visa, was detained and deported from the US after a brief trip to Australia. Upon returning through Houston, he was accused of drug trafficking, interrogated for hours, and ultimately banned from the US for five years. Officials cited his intent to remain in the US, despite his visa’s validity and prior re-entries, as justification. This incident is one of several similar cases recently reported, highlighting potential issues with US border control procedures.
Read More
Across Pennsylvania, numerous universities, including Carnegie Mellon, Pitt, and Penn State, are reporting the unexplained revocation of international student visas. One affected CMU student, Jayson Ma, faces deportation despite his impending graduation and his mother’s terminal illness. Universities are offering support to affected students, but the reasons for the revocations remain unclear, with some speculation linking them to past legal issues, even if expunged. Students are advised to carry necessary documentation and prepare for potential deportation.
Read More
The Supreme Court upheld a lower court order mandating the Trump administration facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, wrongly deported to El Salvador, but requested clarification on the order’s scope. While affirming the government’s obligation to aid Abrego Garcia’s release and ensure fair handling of his case, the Court emphasized the executive branch’s authority in foreign affairs. The decision, though requiring the administration to report on actions taken, is a rebuke of its deportation policies, particularly concerning the forcible removal of alleged gang members. The ruling is a win for civil liberties advocates challenging the administration’s actions.
Read More
The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, lifted a restraining order blocking the Trump administration’s deportation of Venezuelan migrants to an El Salvadoran prison under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. This ruling forces migrants to pursue individual habeas corpus petitions in Texas courts, rather than a class-action suit in D.C., significantly hindering their legal recourse. The majority opinion, while claiming to ensure due process, allows the administration to circumvent established legal procedures and potentially subject migrants to indefinite detention without legal representation. Dissenting justices sharply criticized the decision, highlighting the administration’s disregard for the rule of law and comparing it to past injustices.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker