Supreme Court allows Trump's third-country deportations, in major test for president
Category: News & Politics
Via: vic-eldred • last year • 21 commentsBy: Story by Breanne Deppisch, Shannon Bream, Bill Mears
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The Supreme Court on Monday granted the Trump administration's request to stay a lower court injunction blocking them from deporting individuals to third countries without prior notice— a near-term win for the Trump administration as it looks to quickly enforce its immigration crackdown.
Justices on the high court ruled 6-3 to stay the lower court injunction, with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting.
"Rather than allowing our lower court colleagues to manage this high-stakes litigation with the care and attention it plainly requires, this Court now intervenes to grant the Government emergency relief from an order it has repeatedly defied," Justice Sotomayor said.
"I cannot join so gross an abuse of the Court’s equitable discretion," she added.
At issue was a group of migrants challenging their removals to third countries, or countries that were not their country of origin.
Lawyers for those migrants had urged the Supreme Court earlier this month to leave in place a ruling from U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, who previously ordered the Trump administration to keep in U.S. custody all migrants slated for deportation to a country not "explicitly" named in their removal orders – known as a third-country deportation.
Murphy, a federal judge in Boston, presided over a class-action lawsuit from migrants who are challenging deportations to third countries, including South Sudan, El Salvador and other countries, including Costa Rica, Guatemala and others that the administration has reportedly eyed in its ongoing wave of deportations.
Murphy ruled that migrants must remain in U.S. custody until they can have the opportunity to conduct a "reasonable fear interview," or the chance to explain to U.S. officials any fear of persecution or torture should they be released into the country.
Murphy stressed his order does not bar Trump "from executing removal orders to third countries." Instead, he emphasized in an earlier order, "it simply requires" the government "to comply with the law when carrying" out such removals under the U.S. Constitution and the Trump administration's wave of eleventh-hour removals and deportations.
In appealing the case to the Supreme Court, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that Judge Murphy's ruling had blocked them from removing "some of the worst of the worst illegal aliens," including a class of migrants sent to South Sudan earlier this year without due process or notice.
He reiterated in a separate order that the migrants remain in U.S. custody at a military base in Djibouti until each of them could be given a "reasonable fear interview," or a chance to explain to U.S. officials any fear of persecution or torture, should they be released into South Sudanese custody.
The Supreme Court update comes after a flurry of lower court challenges aimed at blocking Trump’s immigration crackdown in his second White House term.
U.S. judges have repeatedly ruled that the Trump administration has violated due process by failing to notify the migrants of their imminent removals, or afford them any opportunity to challenge their deportations in court – a view reiterated, albeit narrowly, by the Supreme Court four separate times since Trump took office.
White House officials, meanwhile, have blasted so-called "activist" judges as attempting to enact a political agenda, and have repeatedly rejected the notion that illegal immigrants are not entitled to due process.
As many as a dozen people from several countries, including Vietnam and Myanmar, were allegedly ordered deported to South Sudan— which lawyers for the immigrants previously argued was in "clear violation" of Judge Murphy's order.
Tags
Who is online
138 visitors
Judge Murphy is probably telling his activist friends: Look at me I slowed Trump down for a good long time.
And then maybe he'll get called in by the 'deep state' and they'll perform a ritual white baby killing and use its blood to write up BLM signs! Yeah, that's the ticket! /s
Here's what Judge Murphy was actually doing:
Oh no! How horrible! A judge that wants the government to follow the law! How dare such an "activist" judge require Trump to "comply with the law"! It's outrageous! Doesn't everyone know Trump is a convicted felon, sexual predator and accused child rapist? How could we ever expect such a man to follow the law?! It's preposterous I tell you! /s
Just out of curiosity, how many illegals got court dates before the "deporter in chief" sent them packing?
Prepare yourself for Thursday. That is when all the district judges learn exactly where their jurisdiction ends.
The deportations under Obama and the ones now under Trump could not be more different, and I supported those deportations just as I support deporting undocumented immigrants with criminal histories today. In both cases, I want the government to follow the law. That's all I'm asking for and that's all this supposedly "activist" Judge was asking for. Follow the fucking law. Is that too hard for the average MAGAites to wrap their tiny bit of gray matter around?
It's cute that you think that. Thursdays just going to be another Thursday and district judges will still be taking cases and applying the law to them as they've been doing and Trump and this administration will continue to defy the law because they're led by a convicted felon who doesn't give a fuck about the law. Thankfully, our justice system and constitution are FAR bigger and stronger than such a little ignorant pissant like Trump who will be just another speed bump after he gets unceremoniously and angrily thrown out of office in three years.
Sure would have been nice if you used the same language about Obama.
You claim that you just want presidents to follow the law and that you support the same type of deportations, but somehow, it is unbelievable that you cared that those during the ‘deporter in chief’ did not get the same court dates you are ranting about today?
Can I guess why?
Can I guess why you're deflecting to Obama once again? Is it because actually defending Donald Trump without invoking Obama and Biden requires mental contortions that are impossible for the human brain to perform without permanent injury?
Could it be that you expect more from trump than you did from Obama? is that why you hold them to different standards? what is the difference between the 2? It couldn't be that you expect less from Barry could it?
He is complying with the law. The law is the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. It allows illegals to be removed without appearing before a court.
It has been used by every administration since. The Democrats and left were fkng SILENT. But now Trump does it and suddenly is a problem? What's pathetic is you don't see the hypocrisy in it.
Hilarious coming from someone who deflected to Trump every time Biden was criticized.
Oh, they see it.
There just is one little letter that does not allow them to acknowledge it.
Can anyone guess what that letter is?
Just show's that it's not the legal / constitutional aspect of the action. It's pathetic partisan bullshit.
How dare he be more successful than his predecessors.
Send them all to Somalia and those illegal Somalians who claim persecution can go to El Salvador
I hear that Somalia is beautiful this time of year.
Omar likes it so much she's trying to turn her district into Somalia.
I'm still trying to figure out how Omar's district became what it is.
Her "leadership". I imagine ICE would be really busy there.
I'm sure many of the Iranians that Biden let in made a mad dash for it.
Didn't the Somali do that when they come into the country?
I don't care where they send them, just so they send them away