The Confrontation Between Trump and the Supreme Court Has Arrived

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
80,511
Reaction score
42,808
Points
2,605
Location
In a Republic, actually
ā€˜America has reached a very dangerous moment, as the Supreme Court’s indulgence of President Donald Trump’s belief in his own untrammeled authority collides with the justices’ expectation that he will abide by their decisions.

This evening, the Supreme Court upheld part of a lower-court decision ordering the Trump administration to seek to retrieve Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom—as The Atlantic first reported—the administration has acknowledged it mistakenly dispatched to El Salvador’s notorious Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT. Abrego Garcia, who came to the United States illegally but was allowed to stay after a judge ruled that he was likely to be persecuted by gangs in his native El Salvador, would be the first person publicly known to be released from CECOT.
[…]
The fact that the order was issued without dissent was remarkable. The Roberts Court has indulged Trump at nearly every turn, first writing the anti-insurrection clause out of the Fourteenth Amendment and then foiling his federal prosecution by inventing a grant of presidential immunity with no basis in the text of the Constitution. Justice John Roberts and his colleagues have deployed a selective proceduralism to avoid directly confronting the Trump administration, one that contrasts with their alacrity in cases where they are seeking their preferred outcome. Yet the confrontation they sought to avoid has arrived nonetheless, and even the Trumpiest justices, such as Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, joined their colleagues in informing the Trump administration that what it had done was illegal and should be remedied.
[…]
If the administration makes an insincere effort to bring Abrego Garcia back, then those rights become the very sort of ā€œparchment barriersā€ James Madison feared would be easily violated. If Trump defies the Court, there is little to restrain him from acting as an autocrat, given the supplication of Republicans in Congress.

The risks here for constitutional government are tremendous. Yet even if this case now unfolds in the ideal way, Trump’s aspirations toward unchecked power mean that the nation will never veer too far from the ā€œpath of perfect lawlessness,ā€ at least not as long as he remains in office.’


There’s no doubt that Trump will ignore the Court's ruling, lying that he ā€˜did his best’ to bring Abrego Garcia back, when in fact no good faith effort was made.

And Trump’s continued defiance of the courts will confirm the fact that America has become an authoritarian fascist state, ruled by a despot and autocrat, not the law.
 
ā€˜America has reached a very dangerous moment, as the Supreme Court’s indulgence of President Donald Trump’s belief in his own untrammeled authority collides with the justices’ expectation that he will abide by their decisions.

This evening, the Supreme Court upheld part of a lower-court decision ordering the Trump administration to seek to retrieve Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom—as The Atlantic first reported—the administration has acknowledged it mistakenly dispatched to El Salvador’s notorious Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT. Abrego Garcia, who came to the United States illegally but was allowed to stay after a judge ruled that he was likely to be persecuted by gangs in his native El Salvador, would be the first person publicly known to be released from CECOT.
[…]
The fact that the order was issued without dissent was remarkable. The Roberts Court has indulged Trump at nearly every turn, first writing the anti-insurrection clause out of the Fourteenth Amendment and then foiling his federal prosecution by inventing a grant of presidential immunity with no basis in the text of the Constitution. Justice John Roberts and his colleagues have deployed a selective proceduralism to avoid directly confronting the Trump administration, one that contrasts with their alacrity in cases where they are seeking their preferred outcome. Yet the confrontation they sought to avoid has arrived nonetheless, and even the Trumpiest justices, such as Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, joined their colleagues in informing the Trump administration that what it had done was illegal and should be remedied.
[…]
If the administration makes an insincere effort to bring Abrego Garcia back, then those rights become the very sort of ā€œparchment barriersā€ James Madison feared would be easily violated. If Trump defies the Court, there is little to restrain him from acting as an autocrat, given the supplication of Republicans in Congress.

The risks here for constitutional government are tremendous. Yet even if this case now unfolds in the ideal way, Trump’s aspirations toward unchecked power mean that the nation will never veer too far from the ā€œpath of perfect lawlessness,ā€ at least not as long as he remains in office.’


There’s no doubt that Trump will ignore the Court's ruling, lying that he ā€˜did his best’ to bring Abrego Garcia back, when in fact no good faith effort was made.

And Trump’s continued defiance of the courts will confirm the fact that America has become an authoritarian fascist state, ruled by a despot and autocrat, not the law.



That is not what happened at all. It merely says "facilitate" release from custody, nothing else, certainly not to bring him back to CONUS. And, that his case be handled as would have been, that is, deported to another country except El Salvador.

They then clearly imply that the order of the District Court to bring him back to CONUS 'may exceed the District Court's authority'.

Now you know the actual, truthful facts of the SCOTUS ruling.

'The Atlantic', liars as usual, fake news as usual.



The rest of the District Court's order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand. The order properly requires the Government to "facilitate" Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.
The intended scope of the term "effectuate" in the District Court's order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court's authority.


 
Last edited:
ā€˜America has reached a very dangerous moment, as the Supreme Court’s indulgence of President Donald Trump’s belief in his own untrammeled authority collides with the justices’ expectation that he will abide by their decisions.

This evening, the Supreme Court upheld part of a lower-court decision ordering the Trump administration to seek to retrieve Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom—as The Atlantic first reported—the administration has acknowledged it mistakenly dispatched to El Salvador’s notorious Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT. Abrego Garcia, who came to the United States illegally but was allowed to stay after a judge ruled that he was likely to be persecuted by gangs in his native El Salvador, would be the first person publicly known to be released from CECOT.
[…]
The fact that the order was issued without dissent was remarkable. The Roberts Court has indulged Trump at nearly every turn, first writing the anti-insurrection clause out of the Fourteenth Amendment and then foiling his federal prosecution by inventing a grant of presidential immunity with no basis in the text of the Constitution. Justice John Roberts and his colleagues have deployed a selective proceduralism to avoid directly confronting the Trump administration, one that contrasts with their alacrity in cases where they are seeking their preferred outcome. Yet the confrontation they sought to avoid has arrived nonetheless, and even the Trumpiest justices, such as Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, joined their colleagues in informing the Trump administration that what it had done was illegal and should be remedied.
[…]
If the administration makes an insincere effort to bring Abrego Garcia back, then those rights become the very sort of ā€œparchment barriersā€ James Madison feared would be easily violated. If Trump defies the Court, there is little to restrain him from acting as an autocrat, given the supplication of Republicans in Congress.

The risks here for constitutional government are tremendous. Yet even if this case now unfolds in the ideal way, Trump’s aspirations toward unchecked power mean that the nation will never veer too far from the ā€œpath of perfect lawlessness,ā€ at least not as long as he remains in office.’


There’s no doubt that Trump will ignore the Court's ruling, lying that he ā€˜did his best’ to bring Abrego Garcia back, when in fact no good faith effort was made.

And Trump’s continued defiance of the courts will confirm the fact that America has become an authoritarian fascist state, ruled by a despot and autocrat, not the law.
This is clearly the test

9-0 Decision is pretty emphatic
 
The order properly requires the Government to "facilitate" Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.
Like, handled with him in the US?

Bigly sad.
 
ā€˜America has reached a very dangerous moment, as the Supreme Court’s indulgence of President Donald Trump’s belief in his own untrammeled authority collides with the justices’ expectation that he will abide by their decisions.

This evening, the Supreme Court upheld part of a lower-court decision ordering the Trump administration to seek to retrieve Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom—as The Atlantic first reported—the administration has acknowledged it mistakenly dispatched to El Salvador’s notorious Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT. Abrego Garcia, who came to the United States illegally but was allowed to stay after a judge ruled that he was likely to be persecuted by gangs in his native El Salvador, would be the first person publicly known to be released from CECOT.
[…]
The fact that the order was issued without dissent was remarkable. The Roberts Court has indulged Trump at nearly every turn, first writing the anti-insurrection clause out of the Fourteenth Amendment and then foiling his federal prosecution by inventing a grant of presidential immunity with no basis in the text of the Constitution. Justice John Roberts and his colleagues have deployed a selective proceduralism to avoid directly confronting the Trump administration, one that contrasts with their alacrity in cases where they are seeking their preferred outcome. Yet the confrontation they sought to avoid has arrived nonetheless, and even the Trumpiest justices, such as Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, joined their colleagues in informing the Trump administration that what it had done was illegal and should be remedied.
[…]
If the administration makes an insincere effort to bring Abrego Garcia back, then those rights become the very sort of ā€œparchment barriersā€ James Madison feared would be easily violated. If Trump defies the Court, there is little to restrain him from acting as an autocrat, given the supplication of Republicans in Congress.

The risks here for constitutional government are tremendous. Yet even if this case now unfolds in the ideal way, Trump’s aspirations toward unchecked power mean that the nation will never veer too far from the ā€œpath of perfect lawlessness,ā€ at least not as long as he remains in office.’


There’s no doubt that Trump will ignore the Court's ruling, lying that he ā€˜did his best’ to bring Abrego Garcia back, when in fact no good faith effort was made.

And Trump’s continued defiance of the courts will confirm the fact that America has become an authoritarian fascist state, ruled by a despot and autocrat, not the law.
Even if they bring him back, they’ll just keep him in custody, determine he is an illegal, and deport him to a different country.
 
There’s no doubt that Trump will ignore the Court's ruling, lying that he ā€˜did his best’ to bring Abrego Garcia back, when in fact no good faith effort was made.

The difference between a strong leader and a nobody like you Celia .
Boo hoo . Celia .
Did Mr Trumpfy being decisive upset you and your extremist Lefty Troll Bot pals ?
Well , tough Cissy .


It's another win for Decent people
 
This is clearly the test

9-0 Decision is pretty emphatic
A test may be coming, but this isn't it.

First, there is no reason for the court to want a fight.

Second if they do, they'll want a better poster boy than this verified MS13 gang member the media is so enamored of.

Third, they didn't even sign the opinion. It was a few paragraphs.

The last case that could have been the kind of test you're envisioning was US v. Nixon over the Watergate tapes. The justices agreed to make it unanimous even though not all agreed.

It was very clear, with no wiggle room. It was signed by all. This unsigned Roberts court decision has plenty of wiggle room for Trump to say he did his best.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: wtb
A test may be coming, but this isn't it.

First, there is no reason for the court to want a fight.

Second if they do, they'll want a better poster boy than this verified MS13 gang member the media is so enamored of.

Third, they didn't even sign the opinion. It was a few paragraphs.

The last case that could have been the kind of test you're envisioning was US v. Nixon over the Watergate tapes. The justices agreed to make it unanimous even though not all agreed.

It was very clear, with no wiggle room. It was signed by all. This unsigned Roberts court decision has plenty of wiggle room for Trump to say he did his best.
Why do you feel the need to lie about this?
Garcia is not a gang member
 
Why do you feel the need to lie about this?
Garcia is not a gang member
You guys make this so easy . . .

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, however, alleged that he was a certified gang member based on information that came from a confidential informant used by county police, records state.

According to Abrego Garcia’s attorneys in his current case, the criminal informant had alleged that Abrego Garcia belonged to an MS-13 chapter in New York, where he has never lived.

The information was enough for an immigration judge in 2019 to keep Abrego Garcia in jail as his immigration case continued, court records state. The judge said the informant was proven and reliable and had verified his gang membership and rank.

 
You guys make this so easy . . .

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, however, alleged that he was a certified gang member based on information that came from a confidential informant used by county police, records state.

According to Abrego Garcia’s attorneys in his current case, the criminal informant had alleged that Abrego Garcia belonged to an MS-13 chapter in New York, where he has never lived.

The information was enough for an immigration judge in 2019 to keep Abrego Garcia in jail as his immigration case continued, court records state. The judge said the informant was proven and reliable and had verified his gang membership and rank.

The judge in 2019 ruled that there was no credible evidence that Garcia was a gang member
 
The judge in 2019 ruled that there was no credible evidence that Garcia was a gang member
Show me the ruling that says there was not credible evidence that Garcia was a gang member. I showed you a judge in 2019 that said he was verified to be an MS13 gang member.
 
Nice try. Well, not really.

I'm not plowing through 21 pages. Post the quote.

Actually, don't bother. You said it was a 2019 ruling. That is from 2025.

So, you're just lying.
Page 14. Reading won’t hurt ya
 
Page 14. Reading won’t hurt ya
Nope.

Quote the part which supports your claim, if any. I did.

Not my first time on a message board. If I read the whole page and it has nothing that supports your claim, you'll say "read for comprehension this time," or some other dodge.

You made the claim, you can support it or not.

Are you sure that citation is from 2019, as you said?
 
Nope.

Quote the part which supports your claim, if any. I did.

Not my first time on a message board. If I read the whole page and it has nothing that supports your claim, you'll say "read for comprehension this time," or some other dodge.

You made the claim, you can support it or not.

Are you sure that citation is from 2019, as you said?
So you didn’t even read it.

Fuck off
 
Back
Top Bottom