Dem
47
GOP
53
And now, the latest developments in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case, the case concerning the U.S. deportees sent to CECOT in El Salvador, and the Los Angeles case against ICE.
Abrego (as he prefers to be known) remains in federal custody for the next 30 days, but only at the request of his attorneys. Waverly Crenshaw Jr., the Tennessee judge who is overseeing the criminal case against Abrego for allegedly facilitating the movement of undocumented people in the U.S., upheld a magistrate judge's order that he be released pending trial. The magistrate judge who set the conditions of his release granted the defense motion to delay the release for 30 days. This request was to allow the judge in the immigration case, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland, to issue an order regarding Abrego's rights, should ICE attempt to detain him again upon his release. And her order, which came down soon after the criminal court's order, says that Abrego must be brought back to Maryland upon his release and that ICE must give Abrego and his attorneys at least 72 hours' notice before initiating any deportation proceedings.
What this means is that 30 days from July 23, the date of the order, Abrego should finally be able to return to his home in Maryland to see his wife and son. But given the Trump regime's vendetta against him after he had the temerity to hire an attorney to fight his deportation, which they admitted was a mistake and a violation of the 2019 stay of removal order, he is likely to remain a target of this government. It should be noted that in prioritizing his deportation, Trump is admitting they have no case against him in criminal court. If he was actually guilty of these crimes, then he should be put on trial and, if convicted, serve his sentence in the United States. After serving time, then he can be deported. But clearly, Trump has no confidence that the charges against him will stand up.
Meanwhile, as readers know by now, despite repeatedly declaring in court that they had no control over the prisoners held at CECOT and so could not even facilitate their return to the U.S., the government managed to use them as political pawns to secure the release of 10 Americans held in Venezuela. So, all 252 men have finally been released from the hellhole where they were tortured and are currently in Venezuela. Since then, a few more details have come to light. One of the "Americans" released and returned to the U.S. is a green card holder who was convicted of a triple murder in Spain and was serving time in Venezuela. So, apparently, if you're a hairdresser, you're a threat to the country's safety and should be deported, but if you're a convicted murderer, Donald Trump will cause untold suffering on the part of hundreds of others just to get you back and set you free. It would seem that when Trump said "they're" sending murderers and rapists, he was talking about himself and his employees.
In a court filing in the case involving Daniel Lozano Camargo, aka "Cristian," who was wrongfully deported in violation of a settlement agreement protecting young people with pending asylum claims, the government admitted that all 252 men can be returned to the U.S. if ordered by a court. It stated that Lozano can return to the U.S. to continue his immigration proceedings "should he wish to return." Other detainees have lawyered up and are seeking contempt orders for their unlawful removal and detention in violation of U.S. District Judge Boasberg's order enjoining the deportation flights to El Salvador.
Finally, oral arguments in the Ninth Circuit were held yesterday on Trump's emergency application for a stay pending appeal of the temporary restraining order enjoining ICE from indiscriminately snatching people off the street in Los Angeles and surrounding areas. To say that the government got a chilly reception from the panel is an understatement. They were skeptical of the government's claims of an "emergency" requiring a stay when, according to the government, none of this is actually happening. If they're not doing what the plaintiff claims they're doing, then how can they be harmed by an order telling them to stop doing what they're not doing?
The government's best argument was that a "follow-the-law" injunction is too broad and vague to adequately apprise agents of what is prohibited. But the response was that the order was more than just "follow the law"—it listed four categories that could not be the sole basis for reasonable suspicion: race, accent/language spoken, location, type of work. And as Judge Jennifer Sung pointed out, Los Angeles is the most diverse city in the country with more than 40% identifying as Hispanic or Latino, so using those factors alone is just as likely to result in the arrest of a law-abiding citizen as someone who is out of status. And the record supports that, with the evidence of the arrest of a U.S. citizen who is Latino and happens to work at a tow yard. The other issue that came up is whether ICE has a policy of these indiscriminate arrests. Judge Ronald Gould repeatedly questioned the DOJ attorney whether agents were told to arrest 3,000 people per day. In the end, the panel seemed somewhat inclined to clarify the lower court's TRO but otherwise uphold it. They should rule soon. (L)