Contact Me By Email


What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White

What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White

Know Anyone Who Thinks Racial Profiling Is Exaggerated? Watch This, And Tell Me When Your Jaw Drops.


This video clearly demonstrates how racist America is as a country and how far we have to go to become a country that is civilized and actually values equal justice. We must not rest until this goal is achieved. I do not want my great grandchildren to live in a country like we have today. I wish for them to live in a country where differences of race and culture are not ignored but valued as a part of what makes America great.

Friday, April 18, 2025

“Never read an opinion like this!” Judges CRUSH Trump in court

Constitutional Crisis: As Trump Ignores Judges’ Orders, Will the Courts Capitulate? | Democracy Now!


"Vince Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, joins us as President Trump’s defiance of the courts is pushing the United States toward a constitutional crisis, with multiple judges weighing whether to open contempt proceedings against his administration for ignoring court orders. On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg criticized officials for continuing to stonewall his inquiry into why planes full of Venezuelan immigrants were sent to El Salvador last month even after he ordered the flights halted or turned around midair. Boasberg noted in his order that Trump officials have since “failed to rectify or explain their actions,” giving the administration until April 23 to respond. This comes as Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen traveled to El Salvador but was blocked from seeing or speaking to Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father who was sent to CECOT on the March flights in what the Department of Homeland Security has admitted was an “administrative error.” Both the Trump administration and the government of Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele have refused to release and return Abrego Garcia. This week, federal Judge Paula Xinis said the administration had made no effort to comply with the order, and said she could begin contempt proceedings. “The government is providing no information, not even the most basic factual information about what’s been happening,” says Warren.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: We begin today’s show with the emerging constitutional crisis, as U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg said Wednesday he found, quote, “probable cause” to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt after its willful disregard of his order last month to halt flights transferring immigration detainees from the U.S. to El Salvador, where they ended up at the notorious CECOT mega-prison. Judge Boasberg noted in his order yesterday Trump officials have since, quote, “failed to rectify or explain their actions.” Boasberg has given the administration one week — that is, until April 23rd — to respond.

In his 46-page ruling, Boasberg recounted what happened when he directed officials to stop the planes from being sent to El Salvador, writing, in part, quote, “By mid-Sunday morning, the picture of what had happened the previous night came into clearer focus. It appeared that the Government had transferred members of the Plaintiff class into El Salvador’s custody hours after this Court’s injunction prohibited their deportation under the Proclamation. Worse, boasts by Defendants intimated that they had defied the Court’s Order deliberately and gleefully. The Secretary of State, for instance, retweeted a post in which, above a news headline noting this Court’s Order to return the flights to the United States, the President of El Salvador wrote: [quote] 'Oopsie … Too late.'”

AMY GOODMAN: And the U.S. secretary of state retweeted the Salvadoran president.

The legal escalation came as Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen traveled to El Salvador but was blocked from seeing or speaking to Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father who was sent to the mega-prison in El Salvador on the March flights in what Homeland Security has admitted was an “administrative error.” Both the Trump administration and the government of President Nayib Bukele have refused to release and return Abrego Garcia.

Senator Van Hollen spoke to reporters in San Salvador yesterday after meeting with the Salvadoran vice president.

SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: The Trump administration is clearly in violation of American court orders. … Why is the government of El Salvador continuing to imprison a man where they have no evidence he’s committed any crime and they’ve not been provided any evidence from the United States that he’s committed a crime? …

President Trump and our Attorney General Pam Bondi and the vice president of the United States are lying when they say that Abrego Garcia has been charged with a crime or is part of MS-13. That is a lie.

AMY GOODMAN: Senator Van Hollen said El Salvador’s vice president told him that they would keep Abrego Garcia locked up since the U.S. government is paying his country to do so. The senator also said more members of Congress are planning to visit El Salvador soon. Van Hollen’s visit came as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth welcomed El Salvador’s defense minister to the Pentagon.

For more, we’re joined by Vince Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

So, Vince, we’ve got these two situations, both clearly leading up to, if we’re not already in, a constitutional crisis. You have the judge in Kilmar’s case demanding evidence that the Trump administration is working to get him home, facilitating. And you’ve got Judge Boasberg saying he is about to find Trump officials in criminal contempt. Explain, start there, and what this is all about — not civil contempt, criminal contempt. The next key date is next Wednesday, April 23rd.

VINCENT WARREN: Yeah. Thank you, Amy.

We actually are in a situation now where we have two federal judges that are demanding information about the government’s actions in deporting people. And that’s a normal exercise. What is not normal here is that the government is providing no information, not even the most basic factual information, about what’s been happening.

So, the courts — the criminal contempt stems from Judge Boasberg’s finding that because the government has apparently deported, sent men to El Salvador after the judge’s order — rather, that they were in El Salvador after the judge’s order, and they could have been brought back, he’s saying that this was done willfully. And, you know, putting that in English, what “willfully” means is that you did it on purpose, you knew what you were doing, and you actually didn’t care. And that is punishable by criminal contempt.

What’s interesting here is that the Supreme Court also, as your viewers know, found that the — it essentially disbanded this big TRO that Judge Boasberg did, but Judge Boasberg is saying, “Look, there was a judicial order from this court saying, 'Turn the planes around,' and you did not do it. You didn’t give us a reason why you didn’t do it. You, you know, posted 'Oopsie' and thumbed your nose at the judge. We can’t have a situation where the administration just doesn’t care what the federal courts say about what they do.”

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, who would be responsible, I mean, if there is, presumably, because, as you said, it’s criminal contempt? Someone would be responsible for carrying out that punishment. But that something would be the Department of Justice, which is itself responsible or answerable to the Trump White House.

VINCENT WARREN: Yeah, this is where it gets really, really messy, Nermeen. So, the court has a number of options. And one of the options is to refer the case to the Justice Department upon a finding of probable cause, and the Justice Department should prosecute. I don’t think that Pam Bondi is going to prosecute anything. So that’s one problem.

Another problem is that the judge will say, “Well, I will appoint a lawyer, a judge, to prosecute this case if the Department of Justice won’t.” That can move forward, but it does require people being brought in before the court to be able to face those charges. And, of course, the entity that actually apprehends people to bring them to the court is the U.S. Marshals, which is under the purview of what? The executive branch.

So, essentially, there are three opportunities for the Trump administration to thumb their nose. Number one, they can say, “No, we’re not going to prosecute.” Number two, they can order the Marshals not to apprehend people. Number three, even if it goes forward, that the president can still issue a pardon. So what we’re talking about here is a constitutional crisis that is going to be made real, only by the inaction and the refusal to comply with the law by the Trump administration.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: But what kind of explanation would be sufficient, do you think, by a week from now, on the 23rd? What would the Trump administration need to provide?

VINCENT WARREN: Well, there are two things that I think are important for this. Number one is that they need to provide real-time information about their attempts to comply with the judge’s order during that time. “Judge, we tried to do this. We asked so-and-so to not send to so-and-so.” And that’s one thing.

Another thing that they can actually do is that they can reassert jurisdiction and custody over the people that are in El Salvador, meaning that they do have the ability, being in U.S. custody even in El Salvador, to be able to comply with the court’s orders, particularly with respect to giving hearings to the men who they’ve transferred.

The irony of this whole thing is that what Judge Boasberg is doing is providing the government with the same type of due process in terms of criminal contempt that the government refuses to give to the men that they have sent to El Salvador. So, due process apparently only works one way. And they will demand due process in these hearings for their government officials, but they will not give it to the people that they’re sending away.

AMY GOODMAN: So, one way that the White House could cure this is just sending the men back on the plane, right? I think that the judge has made that clear. The other way is to explain who is responsible next Wednesday.

And obviously, these two cases are related, because one of the men on those flights was Kilmar. Can you talk about the significance of the Maryland senator — Kilmar is from Maryland — I mean, is Salvadoran, fled gang violence in Salvador, came to Maryland, and there he’s lived for many years.

But also, while they talk about Kilmar, there’s no evidence that he is guilty of any crime. It makes it sound like the other hundreds of men are. You’ve got the front page of The New York Times today, actually, “Labeled 'Alien enemies' and Banished, With Little or No Evidence.” The hundreds of men, a number of them can be in the same situation as Kilmar.

Now, we’ve got the judiciary, we’ve got the executive branch, and we’ve got the legislative branch. That’s Maryland Senator Van Hollen. He can’t get an answer. And we watched President Trump sitting with Salvador’s President Bukele. He didn’t turn to him and say, “I want Kilmar returned.” No one doubts for a minute that if President Trump ordered, that he would be returned immediately.

VINCENT WARREN: Exactly. That situation with the two presidents sitting there, like, “Oh, bro, what are we going to do?” was outrageous. And, you know, I will tell you that if I were in any place in the world and there was a warrant for my arrest to come back to the United States, they would have me back in 45 minutes. So, they’re saying, “Oh, there’s nothing we can do.” It’s outrageous. It’s ridiculous. It’s wrong. It’s a lie.

And I think the significance of congresspeople going down to CECOT to demand to see the people that are there that are in their jurisdiction or from their jurisdiction is really key. I would also note that the El Salvador president has no problem having Republicans come down. They can do, you know, beauty pageants in front of CECOT with Kristi Noem and have Republicans go in, but they’re not allowing the Democrats to go in. That’s pure politics. And it’s actually messing up the way that the judicial branch and the executive branch and legislative branch should be working to solve this problem.

AMY GOODMAN: Do we have proof that Kilmar is even alive?

VINCENT WARREN: I have not heard information on that at all.

AMY GOODMAN: No one has spoken to him, apparently.

VINCENT WARREN: And that’s why — that’s why it’s important for lawyers and for people to be able to come down and see, to see them and to talk with them, because anything could have happened. They could be tortured. They could be dead. They could have medical emergencies. And so, it’s not just an empty political exercise to be able to go down to talk to people. This is sort of core human rights work. You have to lay eyes on human beings to figure out what’s happening to them and what conditions that they’re in, and then you go from there.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, I mean, could you talk, Vince, also about the way in which all of these different law firms, I mean, the entire legal foundation of the U.S., there’s such key institutions that are capitulating to Trump, one after the other? What do you think — what are the effects of that likely to be as Trump continues all of these extralegal measures and invoking the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to do what he’s doing in the first place?

VINCENT WARREN: You know, I talk to people in law firms, and I say, “You have to understand that you right now, law firms, are the biggest tool in building an authoritarian regime.” Because everybody knows the first thing they do is they go after the judiciary, they go after the legislative branch, they go after the lawyers, they go after civil society, they go after universities. This has happened in every country in which there’s been an authoritarian regime.

And here, the lawyers are — the law firms, I should say, are capitulating, and they’re creating a tremendous opportunity, for one, for us to not be able to vindicate the rights of the people that are being taken, but, number two, in these shady deals that they have, they’re agreeing to provide billions of dollars of free legal advice to the Trump administration. And you know doggone well that the Trump administration is not going to allow these law firms, that used to be with us representing the victims, to now represent the victims. They’re only going to represent the perpetrators, which is the Trump administration.

AMY GOODMAN: I mean, this is very important, that Trump has demanded, and a number have acceded to, or several have acceded to, $100 million worth — two law firms, in this case — of pro bono work for the causes that Trump cares about. But what isn’t said is that then they probably will not represent, pro bono, people like those that you work with these law firms to represent. And I was wondering if I could ask you about the one case that you have just joined, Center for Constitutional Rights, in filing an amended habeas corpus petition on behalf of another person taken to CECOT. That’s Edicson David Quintero Chacón. Who is he?

VINCENT WARREN: So, we filed this case because we have a number of clients that are in immigration detention right now and that need to be protected against moving forward. We’re very concerned that the larger case is being sort of obstructed by the fact that these people are being moved. And what we’re trying to do is we’re trying to secure for as many people as we can the right to be able to have their immigration cases done fully and done completely. We’re trying to avoid the context that was happening in the Garcia case, where they just rushed people off, and then the judges and the lawyers are saying, “You shouldn’t take this person, because they’re not who you’re saying that they are.” And we’re trying to be able to put flags in the ground in a number of places in order to make sure that that doesn’t happen to future people.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to thank you very much for being with us. Your final comment, you, a lawyer, deeply concerned about what’s taking place, what you are most watching out for right now?

VINCENT WARREN: What I’m watching out for, and I think what we should be concerned about, really are two things, overall, in the Trump legal fights. And that is, number one, I am concerned that the courts will capitulate and that the courts will — that other federal judges will allow the Trump administration to get away with what they’re trying to do. And the other thing that I’m concerned about is, even if the courts don’t capitulate, if they do issue these orders, I’m very concerned that the Trump administration will say, “Yeah, oopsie. We don’t really care.”

AMY GOODMAN: Vince Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

Next up, Sudan is facing the world’s largest humanitarian crisis as it enters its third year of a devastating civil war. We’ll speak with a Darfurian refugee and with the head of the Norwegian Refugee Council, both about Sudan and also the DRC, the Democratic Republic of Congo. Stay with us."

Constitutional Crisis: As Trump Ignores Judges’ Orders, Will the Courts Capitulate? | Democracy Now!

Wednesday, April 16, 2025

Atlanta firm files lawsuit on behalf of 17 people whose student visas were canceled by ICE, including 7 with Georgia ties

Atlanta firm files lawsuit on behalf of 17 people whose student visas were canceled by ICE, including 7 with Georgia ties

“An Atlanta law firm filed a lawsuit on behalf of 17 students, including seven from Georgia, whose student visas were revoked by ICE. The suit claims the visa terminations were unlawful and violated the students’ due process rights, as the grounds cited by ICE did not provide legal authority for the terminations. The suit seeks to declare the terminations unlawful and vacate the visa terminations.

According to the suit, the plaintiffs include one Kennesaw State, two Georgia Tech and two UGA students, and two more who are part of postgrad training program.

ATLANTA — An Atlanta law firm is filing a lawsuit on behalf of 17 people whose student visas were revoked by ICE.

11Alive obtained a copy of the suit from Atlanta immigration attorney Charles Kuck and his firm Kuck Baxter.

The suit represents 17 unnamed students, but lists their school affiliations and current residences. They include one Kennesaw State, two Georgia Tech and two University of Georgia students, and two more (one affiliated with Emory University and another affiliated with Georgia Tech) who are part of postgrad training program.

In the instances of the seven Georgia-affiliated visa holders, all believed their visas were revoked in connection to citations (mostly traffic offenses) or arrests with charges that were either dismissed or, the suit argues, were not crimes for which people can be deported.

Of those seven, five are Chinese citizens, one is from India and one is from Colombia.

The student from Colombia, the suit says, is a D1 athlete with a 4.0 GPA who was arrested on a domestic violence charge that she later had dismissed "because there was no underlying proof of any crime." She is "highly valued by her college, which desires for her to continue to be enrolled in school."

The other 10 people span schools including Duke, Cornell, North Carolina State, Arizona State and Saint Louis University, with residences including Texas, New York and California.

The suit comes after both Emory and UGA acknowledged students or postgrad training program participants affiliated with their schools had visas canceled — though based on the affiliations listed, this new suit doesn't represent all the students included in reports last week. 

The suit asserts the individuals' Student and Exchange Visitor Information Systems (SEVIS) records were "abruptly and unlawfully terminated" by ICE, "stripping them of their ability to pursue their students and maintain employment in the United States and risking their arrest, detention and deportation."

SEVIS, according to the suit, is a government system that tracks student visa compliance, and that ICE terminated the 17 records for the people included in the lawsuit by changing their status within the system to "OTHER — Individual identified in criminal records check and/or has had their VISA revoked. SEVIS record has been terminated" or "Otherwise Failing to Maintain Status."

"The grounds cited by ICE in the SEVIS terminations do not provide legal authority to terminate Plaintiffs' SEVIS record," the suit argues. "An F-1 visa controls a student's entry into the country, not their continued lawful presence once admitted. Plaintiffs were in full compliance with the terms of their F-1 status and had not engaged in any conduct that would warrant the termination of their status."

The suit further argues these actions appear to be "designed to coerce students, including each Plaintiff, into abandoning their studies and 'self-deporting' despite not violating their status." It says the Fifth Amendment due process rights of the visa holders have been violated by the government because they were not provided a "detailed basis for such termination founded in law, nor a period to respond and rebut the termination."

The suit is asking the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in Atlanta to declare the termination of the SEVIS records unlawful and to vacate the termination of the student visas.

It named as defendants Attorney General Pam Bondi, Sec. of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Acting Director of ICE Todd Lyons.

A motion for a temporary restraining order and expedited preliminary injunction was filed in the case.”

Tuesday, April 15, 2025

Federal judge tees up CONTEMPT as Trump defies court ruling

Majorie Taylor Greene caught in potential FELONY SCANDAL

DESPICABLE! Trump DOJ Terminates ‘Illegal DEI’ Settlement Over Raw Sewag...

Trump Grows Increasingly Combative in Showdowns With the Courts - The New York Times

In Showdowns With the Courts, Trump Is Increasingly Combative

"Scholars say that the Trump administration is now flirting with lawless defiance of court orders, a path with an uncertain end.

The exterior of the Supreme Court, seen behind trees.
The Trump administration has responded contentiously to orders from the Supreme Court and lower courts alike.Kenny Holston/The New York Times

The Trump administration’s compliance with court orders started with foot-dragging, moved to semantic gymnastics and has now arrived at the cusp of outright defiance.

Large swaths of President Trump’s agenda have been tied up in court, challenged in scores of lawsuits. The administration has frozen money that the courts have ordered it to spend. It has blocked The Associated Press from the White House press pool despite a court order saying that the news organization be allowed to participate. And it ignored a judge’s instruction to return planes carrying Venezuelan immigrants bound for a notorious prison in El Salvador.

But Exhibit A in what legal scholars say is a deeply worrisome and escalating trend is the administration’s combative response to the Supreme Court’s ruling last week in the case of a Salvadoran immigrant. The administration deported the immigrant, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, to El Salvador despite a 2019 ruling from an immigration judge specifically and directly prohibiting that very thing.

Until recently, none of this was in dispute. “The United States acknowledges that Abrego Garcia was subject to a withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador, and that the removal to El Salvador was therefore illegal,” the Supreme Court said on Thursday in an unsigned and to all appearances unanimous order.

The justices upheld a part of an order from Judge Paula Xinis of the Federal District Court in Maryland that had required the government to “facilitate” Mr. Abrego Garcia’s return. He had by then been held for almost a month in one of the most squalid and dangerous prisons on earth.

The administration’s response has been to quibble, stall and ignore requests for information from Judge Xinis. In an Oval Office meeting on Monday between Mr. Trump and President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador, both men made plain that they had no intention of returning Mr. Abrego Garcia to the United States.

President Trump and President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador seated next to each other in the Oval Office.
President Trump and President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador said during a meeting in the Oval Office on Monday that they would not return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to the United States.Eric Lee/The New York Times

In remarks in the Oval Office and on television, Stephen Miller, Mr. Trump’s top domestic policy adviser, said the administration’s earlier concessions, made by several officials and in a Supreme Court filing, were themselves mistaken, the work of a rogue lawyer. He added that the Supreme Court had unanimously endorsed the administration’s position that judges may not meddle in foreign policy.

Ed Whelan, a conservative legal commentator, said that was a misreading of the ruling.

“The administration is clearly acting in bad faith,” he said. “The Supreme Court and the district court have properly given it the freedom to select the means by which it will undertake to ensure Abrego Garcia’s return. The administration is abusing that freedom by doing basically nothing.”

White House officials did not respond to requests for comment.

The administration has also responded to court orders blocking its programs in other ways, speaking to audiences outside the courtroom. Mr. Trump and his allies have waged relentless rhetorical attacks on several judges who have ruled against the president, at times calling for their impeachment and at others suggesting that Mr. Trump is not bound by the law.

Assessing whether, when and how much the administration is defying the courts is complicated by a new phenomenon, legal scholars said, pointing to what they called a collapse in the credibility of representations by the Justice Department. These days, its lawyers are sometimes sent to court with no information, sometimes instructed to make arguments that are factually or legally baseless and sometimes punished for being honest.

Defiance, then, may not be a straightforward declaration that the government will not comply with a ruling. It may be an appearance by a hapless lawyer who has or claims to have no information. Or it may be a legal argument so outlandish as to amount to insolence.

Sanford Levinson, a law professor at the University of Texas, said the Trump administration had exposed dual fault lines, in the constitutional structure and in the limits of permissible advocacy.

“I would like to think that at least some of the Trump administration’s arguments have crossed that line,” Professor Levinson said, “but, frankly, I don’t really know where the line is.”

Courts generally give government lawyers the benefit of the doubt, presuming that they are acting in good faith even when they make ambitious arguments for a broad conception of executive power.

“We are beyond that point,” said Marin Levy, a law professor at Duke. “It is alarming that we are even having to ask whether the government is failing to comply with court orders.”

Just hours after the Supreme Court ruled in Mr. Abrego Garcia’s case, Judge Xinis asked the government three questions on Thursday night: Where was Mr. Abrego Garcia being held? What steps had the government taken to get him home? And what additional steps did it plan to take?

Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, a lawyer for Mr. Abrego Garcia, speaking alongside his client’s wife after a federal court hearing in Greenbelt, Md., this month.Allison Robbert for The New York Times

At first, the administration’s lawyers refused to respond, saying in a court filing on Friday that they needed more time and at a hearing that day that they had no answers to the judge’s questions.

Judge Xinis wrote that they had “failed to comply with this court’s order,” and she called for daily updates, at 5 p.m., a deadline the administration has treated as a suggestion.

On Saturday, an administration official grudgingly acknowledged that “Abrego Garcia is currently being held in the Terrorism Confinement Center in El Salvador.” The official said nothing about what the government was doing to facilitate the prisoner’s return.

Mr. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers have urged Judge Xinis to consider holding the government in contempt, a question she may consider at a hearing on Tuesday.

Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University, said the administration was “certainly close to defiance in the Abrego Garcia case.”

“At the very least,” he said, “they are taking maximal advantage of possible ambiguity in the meaning of ‘facilitate.’ It is not plausible to interpret that term as meaning they need make no real effort.”

In a brief filed on Sunday, the administration argued that the Supreme Court’s requirement that it “facilitate” Mr. Abrego Garcia’s return meant only that it must “remove any domestic obstacles that would otherwise impede the alien’s ability to return here.”

That argument, Michael Dorf, a law professor at Cornell, wrote in a blog post, “does not pass the laugh test.”

Still, last week’s Supreme Court decision gave the administration some room to maneuver, notably in instructing Judge Xinis to clarify her initial ruling “with due regard for the deference owed to the executive branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” The decision added: “For its part, the government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps.”

The dispute seems certain to return to the justices if the administration sticks to its hard-line approach. Should lower courts order Mr. Abrego Garcia’s return or hold officials in contempt, the administration will surely again ask the Supreme Court to intervene. And if Mr. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers cannot secure his return, they too will seek further help from the justices.

Other disputes have also raised questions about whether the administration is defying the courts. A district court judge in Washington, for instance, ordered the White House to back off from its stated policy of barring The Associated Press from its press pool. But the administration showed no signs of budging.

Alex Brandon, an Associated Press photographer, was barred from joining the Oval Office press pool at the White House on Monday.Eric Lee/The New York Times

Last week, Judge Trevor McFadden ruled that the White House had discriminated against the wire service by using access to the president as leverage to compel its journalists to adopt the term “Gulf of America” in their coverage. When the outlet refused, the White House began to turn its reporters away from the pool of journalists who cover the president daily.

Until February, The A.P. and its competitors, such as Reuters and Bloomberg, reliably sent reporters to travel with the president on Air Force One and to cover exclusive events in the Oval Office and the East Room every day a president had scheduled public events.

Recognizing that the administration would most likely challenge his ruling, Judge McFadden put his decision on hold until Sunday, and the government promptly filed its appeal on Thursday. But the stay expired on Monday, and the appeals court did not intervene to keep it in place.

Even so, the administration did not allow either a print journalist or a photographer from The A.P. to be included in the pool to cover Monday’s events, including the meeting between Mr. Trump and Mr. Bukele. The White House’s only acknowledgment of the deadline appeared to be in a filing on Monday asking the appeals court to restore the temporary stay.

The Trump administration has seemingly capitalized on confusion in other cases.

Long after judges ordered the administration to unfreeze funding from contracts and grants disbursed by U.S.A.I.D. and FEMA, contractors and states led by Democrats repeatedly reported that payments were still being held up. Twice in February, judges granted motions to enforce their orders, finding that the administration was dragging its feet.

The gap between lawyerly obstinacy and flat-out defiance seems to shrink by the day, at least in the lower courts. For now, neither the president nor the justices seem eager for the ultimate constitutional confrontation.

“If the Supreme Court said, ‘Bring somebody back,’ I would do that,” Mr. Trump said on Friday. “I respect the Supreme Court.”

Zach Montague contributed reporting

Adam Liptak covers the Supreme Court and writes Sidebar, a column on legal developments. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law for 14 years before joining The Times in 2002."

Trump Grows Increasingly Combative in Showdowns With the Courts - The New York Times

Monday, April 14, 2025

Trump Administration Live Updates: U.S. and El Salvador Say They Won’t Return Man Who Was Mistakenly Deported

Trump Administration Live Updates: U.S. and El Salvador Say They Won’t Return Man Who Was Mistakenly Deported

The White House and El Salvador’s President Bukele both stated they would not return a Maryland man mistakenly deported to El Salvador. The ACLU filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s deportation of Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador.

President Trump and President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador stand outside the White House. Mr. Bukele is waving. An American flag is off to the side.
President Trump and President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador at the White House on Monday.Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times

Where Things Stand

  • Deportations: The White House on Monday scoffed at the prospect of returning from El Salvador a Maryland man who had been mistakenly deported, despite court orders urging the Trump administration to pursue his return. White House officials said it was up to El Salvador to decide whether to do so. But President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador, in a visit to the Oval Office, said the idea that he would send the man back was “preposterous.”

  • Lawsuit: The American Civil Liberties Union filed another lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s use of a powerful wartime statute to deport Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador. The lawsuit, brought in Federal District Court in Colorado, was the third of its kind filed in recent days. Read more ›

  • Tariffs: Mr. Trump is expected to announce new tariffs this week, including likely those on semiconductors, which are a vital component in electronics, cars, toys and other goods. Democrats and Republicans alike have described a reliance on an industry largely based in Asia as a major national security risk. Read more ›

BREAKING: Trump undermines his OWN attorneys in court

Supreme Court Orders U.S. to “Facilitate” Return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador | Democracy Now!



Michigan Lawyer Detained at Detroit Airport, Phone Seized; He Represents Pro-Palestine Protester | Democracy Now!


Michigan Lawyer Detained at Detroit Airport, Phone Seized; He Represents Pro-Palestine Protester | Democracy Now!

Trump Live Updates: Latest Tariffs, Layoffs and Deportations News - The New York Times

Trump Administration Live Updates: President to Meet Salvadoran Leader as U.S. Ramps Up Deportations

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One.
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One during a flight to Maryland from Florida, on Sunday.Tom Brenner for The New York Times

"Where Things Stand

  • Deportations: President Trump will meet with President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador at the White House on Monday as the administration steps up its use of a notorious Salvadoran prison to hold migrants deported by the United States. On Sunday, the administration again tried to resist a federal judge’s order to return a Maryland man who was unlawfully deported to the prison, known as CECOT. Read more ›

  • Layoffs: Federal agencies are facing a Monday deadline to present plans for another round of mass firings, part of the administration’s drive to shrink the government and reshape the civil service. The cuts come at the direction of the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, the government overhaul initiative led by Elon Musk. Read more ›

  • Tariffs: Mr. Trump signaled on Sunday that he would pursue new tariffs on the computer chips inside smartphones and other technologies, two days after his administration excluded some electronics from the import taxes applied on goods arriving from China. The administration has scrambled to explain its shifting strategy, after it said that no company or industry would be shielded from the levies. Read more ›

Rob Copeland
April 14, 2025, 8:27 a.m. ET

Goldman Sachs is expected to give its take on how tariffs are impacting its business during the bank’s regularly scheduled quarterly earnings call this morning. Some twitchiness, however, is in the air; during a briefing with reporters earlier, a spokeswoman repeatedly cut in to discourage questions about the White House and the trade environment. David M. Solomon, Goldman’s chief executive, said in a statement: “We are entering the second quarter with a markedly different operating environment than earlier this year.”

The Environmental Protection Agency in Washington. An E.P.A. scientist said that supervisors and managers in federal agencies had come to rely on the news media to learn about their job security.Eric Lee/The New York Times

Federal agencies are facing a deadline on Monday to present their plans for another round of mass firings, the next step in the Trump administration’s drive to shrink the government that figures to further reshape a civil service that has endured tens of thousands of departures.

Some agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human Services, have already announced their layoffs for this round of dismissals, which follows the terminations in February of thousands of probationary federal employees. The cuts have come at the direction of the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, the government overhaul initiative led by the tech billionaire Elon Musk.

The Trump administration has justified its use of a wartime authority to deport migrants to El Salvador by alleging that they are members of violent gangs.Tom Brenner for The New York Times

President Trump will meet with President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador at the White House on Monday as the administration ramps up its use of a notorious Salvadoran prison for holding migrants deported by the United States.

In Mr. Bukele, who has referred to himself as the world’s “coolest dictator,” Mr. Trump has found a willing partner in a plan for deportations with little or no due process. The removal of the migrants to the prison, known as CECOT, has become a flashpoint in the administration’s attempt to skirt normal immigration practice and the role of the courts in reviewing Mr. Trump’s executive power.

Jennifer Stefania Vasquez Sura, the wife of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, and one of her husband’s lawyers after a hearing on Friday.Allison Robbert for The New York Times

The Trump administration on Sunday evening doubled down on its assertion that a federal judge cannot force it to bring back to the United States a Maryland man who was unlawfully deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador last month.

In a brief legal filing, the Justice Department reiterated its view that courts lack the ability to dictate steps that the White House should take in seeking to return the man, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, to U.S. soil, because the president alone has broad powers to handle foreign policy.

The Foxconn plant in Shenzhen, China, is a major part of Apple’s supply chain responsible for much of the iPhone’s assembly.Qilai Shen for The New York Times

President Trump signaled on Sunday that he would pursue new tariffs on the powerful computer chips inside smartphones and other technologies, just two days after his administration excluded a variety of electronics from the steep import taxes recently applied on goods arriving from China.

The push came as Mr. Trump’s top economic advisers scrambled to explain their shifting strategy, after having insisted for weeks that they would shield no company or industry from any of the fees they have levied in a bid to reset U.S. trade relationships."


Trump Live Updates: Latest Tariffs, Layoffs and Deportations News - The New York Times