The Trump administration's refusal to comply with a Supreme Court order to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador exemplifies its disregard for the rule of law. The administration claims it's El Salvador's responsibility, a claim echoed by President Bukele, despite Bukele possessing the power to return Garcia.
Abrego Garcia, deported despite a protective order, lacks substantial evidence of gang affiliation. The administration's assertion of his guilt relies on weak evidence, contrasting with the fact that 90% of those deported in the “mass deportation” program had no criminal records. The administration’s admission of error was dismissed by Stephen Miller as the work of a “saboteur”.
The administration's interpretation of the Supreme Court's directive centers on the deference owed to the executive branch in foreign affairs, thus justifying non-compliance. Officials like Miller and Rubio argued that U.S. courts cannot interfere with foreign policy.
This act of defiance signifies a profound contempt for the judiciary and the rule of law. The administration's logic suggests it could extend such actions to American citizens, given the assertion that actions against anyone, regardless of citizenship, are permissible if deemed a matter of foreign policy. Trump’s comments about deporting American citizens and building more detention facilities in El Salvador heighten these concerns.
Justice Sotomayor, in a statement, highlights the administration's implied ability to detain anyone without consequence before court intervention. The situation transcends deportation; it's a test of the Supreme Court’s willingness to uphold the Constitution against a lawless president.
The Trump administration's actions underscore a critical constitutional crisis. Their refusal to retrieve Abrego Garcia, while pretending to comply with the court's order, signals a dangerous erosion of due process and the potential for arbitrary actions against any individual. The Supreme Court now faces the crucial decision of upholding the Constitution or accepting presidential lawlessness.