Posted on 05/17/2025 3:57:25 AM PDT by Libloather
U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis excoriated Trump administration lawyers Friday in a remarkable status hearing centered on Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the Salvadorian migrant and alleged MS-13 member who was deported from Maryland to El Salvador in March in what administration officials have acknowledged was an administrative error.
The heated back-and-forth was full of eye-popping exchanges between the judge and the Justice Department, as she took umbrage with their attempts to invoke the state secrets privilege to shield details concerning Abrego Garcia from the court.
"What world are we living in," Xinis asked in disbelief after more than two hours of proceedings. "What sort of legal world are we living in?"
She sparred multiple times with DOJ lawyers over their assertion that Abrego Garcia was lawfully detained and deported.
"He was lawfully detained? No he wasn’t!" Judge Xinis objected. "There was no order of removal, there was no warrant for removal – there was nothing."
She cut off Justice Department attorney Jonathan Guynn again when he attempted to continue with a different argument. "You didn’t even respond to what I just said," she told him. "A DHS attorney came in at the first hearing and confirmed that there was no lawful basis to arrest Abrego Garcia."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Here’s how the Federal judiciary is fast becoming a serious hindrance to the rule of law. During the first eight argument sessions of the current term of the Supreme Court the number of words spoken by each of the nine Justices were monitored. Of the nine, the four most verbose Justices were all four of the women. Let that sink in for awhile.
Start dumping ‘detainees’ on her doorstep.
So this liberal cow wants a warrant and due process for all the illegals Biden let in? With all due respect, your honor, pound sand.
Congress should pass a bill that simply states federal judges can only pass judgments for their jurisdiction.
This is madness to allow 600 Fed judges individually rule the nation in effect.
IMHO
Breaking laws certainly is.
Boy, Satan sure has his claws sunk deep into our government and the judiciary.
Congress should pass a bill that simply states federal judges can only pass judgments for their jurisdiction.
And only for the plaintiffs standing before them. This all inclusive BS is BS. That’s why there is such a thing as class action lawsuits.
Trump is not an ordinary case, but the encapsulation of a doctrine, which TrumpII is ably pursuing.
Trump also represents direct losses by this nutroot's tyrant cadre, fellow travelers Chutkan (Obama) and Mehta (Obama, also FISA-appointed by Roberts to replace Boasberg [Obama]), Childs (Biden), Pan (Biden), and Henderson (Poppy!), as well as Garland and Jack Smith.
Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. 593 (2024), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court determined that presidential immunity from criminal prosecution presumptively extends to all of a president's "official acts" – with absolute immunity for official acts within an exclusive presidential authority that Congress cannot regulate such as the pardon, command of the military, execution of laws, or control of the executive branch.On July 1, 2024, the Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that presidents have absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their core constitutional purview, at least presumptive immunity for official acts within the outer perimeter of their official responsibility, and no immunity for unofficial acts.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, holding that presidents "may not be prosecuted for exercising [core constitutional powers]" granted under the Article II of the United States Constitution, such as commanding the military, issuing pardons, vetoing legislation, overseeing foreign relations, managing immigration, and appointing judges. Roberts explained that neither Congress nor the courts have authority to limit powers exclusively granted to the President under the Constitution.
Courts determining whether acts are official are precluded from examining the motives behind the act or designating an act as unofficial simply due to its alleged violation of the law.
Testimony and records of the President or his advisors pertaining to official acts that are determined to be immune from prosecution would also be excluded from introduction as evidence in the prosecution of other acts." - wiki
You got that right. She is obviously in over her head.
Related...
Cernovich
@Cernovich
SCOTUS under John Roberts made J6’ers sit in prison for 3 years before deciding whether a never before used statute applied to misdemeanor trespass, converting a low level offense to a life-destroying felony.
SCOTUS dropped everything for illegal immigrant criminal gang members.
7:10 PM · May 16, 2025 535.4K Views
https://x.com/Cernovich/status/1923516492043387258
That's what WE'RE wondering.
Power Than the President
A government of the judges, by the judges and for the judges.
May 17, 2025 by Daniel Greenfield
Federal district court judges issuing nationwide injunctions are a constitutional abomination that allows the opposing party to ‘judge shop’ and empowers federal judges to overrule the president not just in local cases, but on a national level, forcing the president to run to the Supreme Court for relief.
That is not remotely the system that the Framers had in mind.
The idea of the Supreme Court overruling the president was controversial back then when applied not just to an individual case but to setting a national precedent, but the idea of a D.C. judge being able to issue a nationwide injunction was inconceivable.
The second term of the Trump administration showed us what happens when a massive activist leftist lawfare campaign coordinates with federal judges to effectively function as a shadow government.
And that means the country is no longer run by a government of elected officials with some appointed officials wielding limited powers, but that it’s the elected officials who have very limited powers, while the appointed officials, whether federal judges or bureaucrats, have virtually unlimited powers.
America ceases to be a government of the people and becomes a government of the judges, by the judges and for the judges.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/every-federal-judge-should-not-have-more-power-than-the-president/
females ... what DON’T they know ...
“ The Skank even looks retarded. The clown should be home baking cookies.‘
Hey! Don’t disparage us wives/mothers who are at home baking cookies! (LoL…)
So you're supposed to get a "removal order" after a "deportation order"? What a croc.
He was not “lawfully detained”? Is ICE required to get a warrant for every individual they round up? The guy was here illegally, & had a criminal background. What more reason should there be?
Says it all, beautifully.
First any blanket asylum process is illegal and perpetrated on us by biden’s illegal actions. Let us start there then you have due process by rounding them up and deporting as they are not eligible for asylum status. You have to back up the chain to the actual illegal actions of biden.
Deep State has dropped its last fig leaf.
It controls the SCOTUS.
A withholding cannot stop deportation if the Attorney General has deemed that the person’s presence in the country poses a danger to the country. No administrative or judicial process required. If it’s the safety of the deportable immigrant versus the safety of the United States, the AG is always authorized to put the safety of the US first. It’s right there in the very “immigration law” that Xinis claims to be citing.
I don’t understand why the government isn’t flat-out telling Xinis this - unless that is the “different argument” that Fox isn’t describing to us, and that Xinis refuses to listen to. Here is the text of the very law she claims makes Abrego Garcia’s deportation illegal (found at https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1231 ) Specifically check out iv:
(3) Restriction on removal to a country where alien’s life or freedom would be threatened
(A) In general
Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), the Attorney General may not remove an alien to a country if the Attorney General decides that the alien’s life or freedom would be threatened in that country because of the alien’s race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.
(B) ExceptionSubparagraph (A) does not apply to an alien deportable under section 1227(a)(4)(D) of this title or if the Attorney General decides that—
(i) the alien ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of an individual because of the individual’s race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion;
(ii) the alien, having been convicted by a final judgment of a particularly serious crime is a danger to the community of the United States;
(iii) there are serious reasons to believe that the alien committed a serious nonpolitical crime outside the United States before the alien arrived in the United States; or
(iv) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the alien is a danger to the security of the United States.
For purposes of clause (ii), an alien who has been convicted of an aggravated felony (or felonies) for which the alien has been sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of at least 5 years shall be considered to have committed a particularly serious crime. The previous sentence shall not preclude the Attorney General from determining that, notwithstanding the length of sentence imposed, an alien has been convicted of a particularly serious crime. For purposes of clause (iv), an alien who is described in section 1227(a)(4)(B) of this title shall be considered to be an alien with respect to whom there are reasonable grounds for regarding as a danger to the security of the United States.
The HELL there wasn't.! He was in this country ILLEGALLY. That means he violated the law... You can be arrested for THAT.!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.