SaintsInDome2006

NYT

Hey it's cool, LOL I actually said the thing you requested I say. But anyway. I enjoyed the discussion, thank you for the responses.

Trump's DHS.

Why, Strike, I must say, you are correct that he wasn't ordered released. Perhaps we should discuss what the Trump administration could have done based upon what was ordered: Presumably the Trump DHS had no basis to find he was a danger to the community, because they did not appeal. They could have found some new basis, which again they did not have since they did not file new request for removal/deportation.

1. The judge - not in the Trump administration - made the ruling. Then - No. 2 - the Trump administration could have appealed or sought to hold him on a different basis. My point to Strike was that the judge's ruling left no room for the Trump administration to do either of those things. They had no basis to hold Garcia.

Well then I disagree. The right wing is arguing that the 2019 order only applied to Guatemala.

Look Strike, much respect, I'm serious. My point (after your excellent responses) wasn't that the judge ordered him released, my point was that the Trump administration in 2019. The judge stated there was no basis for removal - there was no danger to the community (and again look at the court's findings) - so what basis did the Trump DHS have for holding him?

You're talking about something completely different here. This is the Trump DOJ's claim - in 2025 - about sending Garcia to the maxi-prison. In 2025, not 2019. There was no "administrative error" in 2019.

Let's say you're right on this. - Fine. But if so that is on the Trump administration. And personally - this is just my POV - actually no, I disagree because the judge left them no choice. You disagree with me, fine, but in the facts - which I quoted for you in SPOILERS - there was no basis for holding him. And yes that's why I posted the order, I'm fine with you arguing about it but I see it differently.

The right is arguing that the order did not apply to El Salvador. Right, but at that point there was no basis for Trump's INS/DOJ to hold him, so they released him. After he won the “withholding of removal” decision, Trump's own agencies released Garcia to go home. The Trump ICE/DHS saw no any danger to the community because they did not appeal which they could have. Instead they monitored Garcia who made all appointments and that continued for 5+ years.

This is in the Order.

I just responded to you, glad to discuss. My only point when I posted the 1st time was that Garcia was ordered released in 2019 and the Trump administration didn't appeal it. I'm sure you agree it says that much.

So the "Witholding of removal" means specifically to a single country, in this case El Salvador. Apparently SID read this ENTIRE document EXCEPT the one sentence that blows his whole narrative up. ... For one thing, you ...(not accusing you of anything btw)... you failed to point out that the court was referring to a different, cited case. (INS vs. Aguirre). It wasn't the case at issue, it was a general rule. For another - the facts found by the court - which I quoted for you further up - are all about Garcia's history in El Salvador. And the above.

I'm happy to look at your reply above. I'm glad you are looking at the order (which I posted the first time a few days back).

I quoted the actual order. Happy to look at the above.

Which I posted. For you.

Probably because of a host of treaties, agreements & conventions. Bukele is notoriously corrupt as is the head of the prison. No doubt a good chunk of the $12 million we’re paying to store 220 prisoners is going directly to them to ignore such things.

People who enter illegally can request asylum. They all do.

Thank you. And I mean that in all the ways.

Yes, it's different - INS/ICE deportations and removals are handled under the 1969 INA, passed by Congress under its Art. I authority. The person seeking asylum gets a hearing or determination under an Immigration Judge. The Feds may appeal it.

This is the problem. People do not want to negotiate or result to reason. The reason is the influence of money and media, and these days MSM is not the problem. Either we support the Constitution and democracy or we don't. I do. My guess is somewhere along the line you swore an oath to uphold the law and Constitution, am I right?

I'll give you some examples of situations where redundancies are built in as an improvement: nuclear plants, oil wells and space travel. Now if you or I don't understand how those three things work we might well walk in and say, why it looks like they're doing the same thing repeatedly in different ways for no reason. But why? Because of the risk of failure, because humans and processes and assumptions break down. Eliminating or ignoring redundancies can be very costly and dangerous.

Right, an immigration judge and the due process afforded under the INA. And actually unlike ordinary criminal cases if the Feds / DHS / ICE lost they could appeal. Like in the Garcia case where after the judge ruled for Garcia in 2019 the Trump administration chose not to appeal even though they could have.

The quoted finding of facts is on Page 3. The quoted order is on the last page.

Warning: this is called "Information".