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 ...
The better solution is for Red State governors to declare martial law and call for the arrest and removal of illegal aliens from within their borders. Governors already have legal precedence for declaring martial law in their States. Again, lots of court battles, but before it is settled, we get rid of a lot of illegals.
For that to happen, we must win the midterms, or they will undoubtedly try to impeach Trump. Winning midterms makes it less likely. He is not violating the Constitution, since neither the Constitution nor the law is clear on this matter. It has been declared before, and State Executives have done it. SCOTUS rules that Congress must approve of martial law, and Trump says okay.
Paula Xinis another graduate of the Roy Bean School of Law.
I love it when Americans tell these so-called “judges” to go **** themselves. They don’t want to listen to us, we don’t have to listen to their mangy butts.
So this liberal cow wants a warrant and due process for all the illegals Biden let in?
Right. For some reason, this is never brought up by the DOJ lawyers. Also, the courts, including the SCOtUS, are not protecting American citizens by their rulings. Seems to me they should consider American citizens over criminal illegals.
We can’t wait till the midterms to settle this. We need to go scorched earth now!
I have always been in awe of the wisdom and foresight of many of our founding fathers. This passage by Jefferson is a prime example.
I really doubt that this judge (and many others) should be in charge of a parking violation court. What correspondence school did she get her “law” degree from???
Die on this hill, Democrats.
On the premise that illegal alien criminals are entitled to tie up our courts of lesbians swamp-dwelling Marxist judges rather than be thrown right out of the country by any means.
Try going to any country illegally. And be a criminal there. See what happens.
I wonder if the judge realizes she’s getting the old run around? 😆
One in which some judge does not have the legal authority to overrule the President of the USA.
Ever heard of the separation of powers and the coequal branches of government?
Yes. And by virtue of his involvement in a gang which does the very things he wants to be protected from he was NEVER ELIGIBLE to receive a withholding.
But the point for Xinis (and the rest of the US) to understand is that there doesn’t have to be a judicial or administrative process to negate the withholding if the AG finds good reason to believe the alien poses a danger to the security of the US. If the government attorneys would simply read the statute aloud in court it would become obvious that Xinis is just blowing crap out of her.... nose.
Legalese is always complicated, but the gist of it is easy to understand: if a deportable alien poses a danger to the US in the view of the AG, the AG can deport them even to a place considered dangerous to the alien. Period.
“the only JD response reported in the entire story.”
Fox News can better shape our opinions by a few well-chosen (cherry-picked) quotes. Extended quotes are more nearly reporting the news.
Another thing the judge is ignoring is that MS-13 was declared to be a terrorist organization. That means that the AG is going to consider anybody in MS-13 to pose a threat to the security of the US. That, right there, means that any deportable alien who is a member of MS-13 (or Tren de Arague, or a drug cartel...) cannot be protected by a withholding. Anybody who has already been found deportable, is known to be a member of a terrorist organization, and is only here because of a withholding was put on notice at that point, that the withholding could no longer be in force.
Abrego Garcia already had his due process that found him deportable. The only reason he wasn’t deported was because of this withholding based on him being an MS-13 member. ICE or DHS didn’t need a reason to arrest him; the reason stopping them from arresting and deporting him all along was no longer binding because of the designation of MS-13 as a terrorist organization.
He was not deported because he was a terrorist; he was deported because the legal process had found him deportable because he had entered the country illegally and didn’t apply for asylum within a year. But because the AG had good reason to believe that as a member of a terrorist organization (MS-13) he posed a danger to the security of the US, the withholding that had staved off his deportation was rendered not legally binding.
The process for deporting somebody based on being associated with terrorism is for those who would not otherwise be deportable. That process does not apply to Abrego Garcia, who was already found deportable for other reasons. So, for instance, if an alien is here legally and not deportable but the government believes they are a terrorist, there is due process that applies, with special rules of evidence, etc. to determine that they are deportable because they are a terrorist. That is NOT the due process that Abrego Garcia qualifies for. He already had his due process that found him deportable - even without being a member of MS-13.
The MS-13 membership was the basis for him not being allowed to go free on bond during the proceedings, and the judge in that case said that he was provided the opportunity to refute the evidence that he was a member of MS-13 and did not. He provided character witnesses but did not in any way rebut the evidence cited against him. And since then there is even more evidence that has been exposed - specifically the testimony of the father of his wife’s other children who made a legal filing saying Abrego Garcia was a gang member AND his apparently new knuckle tattoos representing MS-13.
An alien who abuses children is automatically deportable, as well. His wife dropped her charges of domestic abuse after being pressured. If CPS had investigated and substantiated her claims he would have also been deportable on those grounds. But none of that was necessary because he was already found deportable on other grounds.
"Judge on warpath presses Trump DOJ on Abrego Garcia deportation, answers leave courtroom in stunned silence"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
On behalf of the judge, in my opinion US immigration / invasion laws are conflicted simply because we've never had a Congress that has fully respected or understood the Constitution imo.
In fact, Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker and one of the few bright lights in Congress's history imo, had complained that Congress's poor writing skills (my words) in making laws (deliberately?) gave activist judges the opportunity to read anything that they want to into a law.
"During the subsequent legislative process, the following key provision was deleted: "there shall be no discrimination in civil rights or immunities among the inhabitants of any State or Territory of the United States on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." John Bingham was an influential supporter of this deletion, on the ground that courts might construe the term "civil rights" more broadly than people like Wilson intended [emphasis added]." —Civil Rights Act of 1866
At the other extreme concerning current hearing, President Eisenhower was able to remove 1 million+ Mexican citizens from the country in Operation Wetback (slang) in the name of "illegal immigration" with no major problems from judges that I've found, corrections welcome. I don't know if Trump Administration has argued the Eisenhower precedent in this illegal immigration case.
The Bracero Program (1942–1964)
The democommies are desperate to keep their census numbers as high as possible come 2030. Otherwise they stand to lose up to 20-30 seats due to population loss.
Everyone thinks I have connections because, years ago, I HAD connections. I don’t. Bannon doesn’t talk to me. I wouldn’t want to talk to Karl Rove. Rush is dead. Glenn Beck decided he doesn’t like me.
So really, I don’t have connections any more.
Sounds good to me, but not a Liberal Federal Judge…..
Faux News.
Paul Ryan approved of this message.
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.