Law & Crime: ‘Unquestionably violative of this court’s order’: Judge upbraids Trump admin for deporting migrants to war-torn third country without due process

A federal judge on Wednesday said that the Trump administration had “unquestionably” violated his order by deporting several migrants to South Sudan — a country from which none of the migrants are from — without due process or a reasonable opportunity to raise concerns of their fear of the war-torn nation, an action he said could amount to criminal contempt of court.

U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy upbraided attorneys from the Justice Department, accusing them of ignoring the “long history” of legal precedent surrounding due process rights as well as recent orders from the U.S. Supreme Court when they sent seven men to South Sudan with less than 24 hours notice.

Murphy last month issued a preliminary injunction barring the government from deporting migrants to third countries without giving them a “reasonable opportunity” to raise concerns about that country and the possible violence they could face.

Murphy scheduled a hearing after an emergency motion filed by attorneys for the plaintiffs informed the court that at least two of their clients had been notified on Monday evening that they were being removed to South Sudan and were transported out of ICE facilities at around 9:30 a.m. Tuesday morning.

“The department’s actions in this case are unquestionably violative of this court’s order,” Murphy said at Wednesday’s hearing. “It is plain to me that an ‘opportunity to be heard’ of only several hours that were not during business hours, where you couldn’t raise consult with your attorney or your family is insufficient. It was impossible for these people to have a meaningful opportunity to object to their removal to South Sudan.”

Murphy emphasized that even the Supreme Court justices recently confirmed that 24 hours of notice is “plainly insufficient” for the purpose of due process, stating, “I don’t see how anybody could think these people had a reasonable chance to object.”

Washington Examiner: Judge rules Trump administration violated court order with migrant flight to Africa

A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration violated an order he issued last month barring officials from deporting people to countries they are not from without first giving them an adequate chance to object to their removal.

The decision from Judge Brian E. Murphy came after a hearing in Boston to consider an emergency motion filed by lawyers on behalf of a group of men who they said were being deported and sent to South Sudan.

When the hearing began, officials from the Department of Homeland Security said eight immigrants were deported Tuesday on a flight. The officials did not say which country the men were being sent to.

Murphy said the government gave the deported men just over 24 hours’ notice that they were being removed from the country. He called the time frame “plainly insufficient.” 

“The department’s actions in this case are unquestionably violative of this court’s order,” he said.

And King Donald gets bent all out of shape:

The Trump administration slammed Murphy as an “activist judge” after the hearing, accusing him of trying to protect “criminal illegal immigrant monsters.”

“A local judge in Massachusetts is trying to force the United States to bring back these uniquely barbaric monsters

No, King Donald, they are human beings just like you and I, and they are entitled to their day in court.

Also here (no paywall):

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/judge-rules-trump-administration-violated-court-order-with-migrant-flight-to-africa/ar-AA1FdWGa

Washington Examiner: Appellate judge blasts courts’ ‘special treatment’ for illegal immigrants

Circuit Judge James Ho issued a blistering concurrence Tuesday, taking aim at the Supreme Court and other courts’ “special treatment” for illegal immigrants in legal proceedings.

A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit issued an order to expedite the oral arguments of a challenge to the deportation of a group of Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act in Texas. The order came after the Supreme Court vacated the appellate court’s previous ruling, saying it lacked jurisdiction, and denied a bid by the migrants’ lawyers to temporarily stop President Donald Trump’s administration from deporting the group of foreign nationals under the AEA.

Apparently Slo Ho didn’t appreciate the urgency of the higher court and the fact that the higher court had vacated their previous ruling for lack of jurisdiction.

Kudos for the Supreme Court’s sense of urgency. When people are being deported, they can be here today and gone tomorrow, if not sooner.

That’s hardly “special treatment for illegal immigrants”. They’re people, too.


Another article here:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-judge-slams-supreme-court-after-ruling-2075295

NBC News: Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem struggles to define habeas corpus at Senate hearing

“Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country,” Noem said. “That’s incorrect,” a Democratic senator responded.


My God, how stupid is this woman?


Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem mangled a response to a question about habeas corpus at a Senate hearing Tuesday, referring to the constitutional right of due process as a “right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country.”

Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., asked Noem about the constitutional protection after noting that White House adviser Stephen Miller told reporters earlier this month that the administration was “actively looking at” suspending habeas corpus, the right to challenge an arrest or imprisonment.

“I want to clarify your position,” Hassan asked. “What is habeas corpus?”

“Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country, and suspend their right to … ,” Noem responded before she was cut off by Hassan.

“That’s incorrect,” the senator said.

“Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people. If not for that protection, the government could simply arrest people, including American citizens, and hold them indefinitely for no reason,” Hassan said, calling it a “foundational right.”

“So Secretary Noem, do you support the core protection that habeas corpus provides, that the government must provide a public reason in order to detain and imprison someone?” she asked.

Noem responded, “I support habeas corpus. I also recognize that the president of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not.” 

Uhh … no, he doesn’t.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/rcna207986

Talking Points Memo: Trump DOJ Admits It Used Bogus Info In Key Deportation Case

In an important federal case in Massachusetts over whether deportees can be sent to third countries rather than their countries of origin, the Trump administration admitted Friday to a grievous error and managed to compound it in the process.

It’s a bit complicated so let me boil it down to its essentials:

  • Background: A gay Guatemalan national who had a U.S. immigration judge order barring his removal to his home country because he feared continued persecution was instead deported to Mexico in February by the Trump administration, partly on the grounds that he had told ICE that he didn’t fear being sent to Mexico. That was odd because the man, identified only by the initials O.C.G., had previously testified that he had been targeted and raped in Mexico, his lawyers say.
  • Thursday: The Trump DOJ abruptly cancelled the scheduled deposition of an ICE official “whom Defendants previously identified as giving Plaintiff O.C.G. notice of deportation to Mexico and recording his response of lack of fear,” O.C.G.’s lawyers later told the court.
  • Friday: The Trump DOJ filed a “Notice of Errata” admitting that during the judge’s ordered discovery in the case it had been unable to “identify any officer who asked O.C.G. whether he had a fear of return to Mexico.” A key factual element of the Trump administration’s case had evaporated. But it got worse …
  • Sunday: Lawyers for the deportee – who is now in hiding in Guatemala because he fears persecution as a gay man – filed an emergency motion pointing out, among other things, that the government’s filing about its own error revealed the deportees name and other information, further jeopardizing his safety despite a court order anonymizing his identifying information.

Still with me? In the course of admitting its error, the Trump administration outed the gay man who it had wrongfully deported in the first place.

This is what happens when you staff up with a bunch of sycophantic suck-ups and bimbos instead of competent personnel!

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morning-memo/trump-doj-admits-it-used-bogus-info-in-key-deportation-case

Huffington Post: The Supreme Court Has Officially Had Enough Of Donald Trump’s Excuses

A recent decision by the court shows just how done it is with the Trump administration’s failure to obey its orders in Alien Enemies Act cases

Early Friday evening, the Supreme Court issued a pointed decision in the case of a group of Venezuelan detainees who previously faced the imminent risk of being sent to a notorious prison in El Salvador by the Trump administration. In addition to rejecting the administration’s choice to give these detainees only 24 hours notice of their removal, the decision answered a question indirectly posed in the case. Is the highest court in the nation sick of the Trump administration’s bullshit?

The answer, the decision states rather definitively, is yes — at least in immigration cases involving removals under the Alien Enemies Act.

In an eight-page unsigned decision, with only Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissenting, the court firmly rejected how the administration has been using the Alien Enemies Act to quickly remove Venezuelan and Salvadoran immigrants with little to no due process while also effectively calling the administration liars, in so many words.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-supreme-court-alien-enemies_n_682b736ce4b0dc52ee2bfd8b

Raleigh News & Observer: Trump Suffers Blow as Judge Rebukes ‘Invasion’ Claim

U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez, Jr. recently ruled that President Donald Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to detain and deport Venezuelan immigrants is unlawful. Rodriguez determined that the government’s actions exceed the statute’s scope and contradict its plain meaning. The ruling is the first to state that the AEA cannot apply to alleged gang members.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/trump-suffers-blow-as-judge-rebukes-invasion-claim/ss-AA1F0BmB

Independent: Venezuelans ‘barricaded’ doors and ‘threatened to take hostages’ in ICE detention, Trump team alleges

Administration calls on Supreme Court for permission to swiftly deport nearly 200 immigrants detained in Texas

In its latest demand to the Supreme Court to begin swiftly deporting immigrants from the United States, Donald Trump’s administration claims a group of Venezuelan men imprisoned in Texas tried to barricade themselves inside their unit, covered surveillance cameras and threatened to take hostages.

A group of 23 men the administration accused of being Tren de Aragua gang members “have proven difficult to manage,” according to a sworn statement in court documents from an Immigration and Customs Enforcement official.

In an incident on April 23 that has not previously been reported, the men allegedly “refused their breakfast trays and barricaded both the front and rear entrance doors of their housing unit using bed cots” and “covered the surveillance cameras and blocked the housing unit windows.”

They “threatened to take hostages and injure facility contract staff and ICE officers” and “attempted to flood the housing unit by clogging toilets,” according to Joshua D. Johnson, acting ICE director for the Dallas office.

Can you blame them for trying to avoid an illegal deportation to a prison in a third country? They wanted to be deported (legally!) to their home country:

Another image captures a group holding up a sign that reads, in Spanish, “Help, we want to be deported. We are not terrorists.” The sign says “VZLA,” a reference to Venezuela, and suggests they are pleading with authorities to avoid their imprisonment in El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, labeled by human rights groups as a “tropical gulag” and concentration camp.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-administration-supreme-court-alien-enemies-act-b2750299.html

Independent: Trump endorses idea that Supreme Court ruling blocking his deportations under Alien Enemies Act is ‘illegal’

President reposted a comment claiming the Supreme Court was heading down the wrong path by blocking some of Trump’s actions

President Donald Trump endorsed the idea that the United States Supreme Court had placed an “illegal injunction” on him by temporarily blocking his administration’s ability to deport Venezuelans, accused of being gang members, without due process, while litigation on the matter plays out in lower courts.

On Truth Social on Saturday, Trump reposted two posts made by attorney Mike Davis, a close Trump ally and the founder of the Article III project, calling the court’s recent decision “illegal” and claiming it was “heading down a perilous path” by not allowing Trump to continue a constitutionally questionable action.

“The Supreme Court still has an illegal injunction on the President of the United States, preventing him from commanding military operations to expel these foreign terrorists,” Davis wrote.

Do these fools have any understanding as to why the Supreme Court exists?

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-supreme-court-deportation-truth-social-b2753057.html

USA Today: ‘Spaghetti against the wall?’ Trump tests legal strategies as judges block his policies

The Trump administration is fighting to kill 40 court orders blocking its new policies.

  • Solicitor General John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to halt nationwide injunctions against Trump policies but said if class-action lawsuits took their place, he would oppose them too.
  • Legal experts said if the Supreme Court abolishes nationwide injunctions, Trump could cut his losses by limiting the reach of court rulings that go against him.

As the Trump administration fights to kill 40 court orders blocking some of his most controversial or aggressive new policies, legal experts say the government’s strategy is to break the cases apart, into individual disputes, to delay an eventual reckoning at the Supreme Court.

One called President Donald Trump’s legal strategy a “shell game.” Another said government lawyers were “throwing spaghetti against the wall” to see what sticks.

“Their bottom line is that they don’t think these cases should be in court in the first place,” said Luke McCloud, a lawyer at Williams and Connolly who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Brett Kavanaugh when he was on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. “They are looking for a procedural mechanism that will make it the most challenging to bring these sorts of cases.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/05/17/trump-legal-strategies-federal-judges-injunctions/83673013007