whodeycin85
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2009
- Messages
- 9,956
- Likes
- 10,764
And it’s nowhere near as complicated as some here want it to be.Due process, a basic function of our Country, is simply not waste. What a ridiculous take
Not in this case. Where he was told his status had changed. Which it had not. The last case he received due process it said he can stay for now. The government could only remove if they found a place wanting to take him.He’s already had it, at least twice.
Not in this case. Where he was told his status had changed. Which it had not. The last case he received due process it said he can stay for now. The government could only remove if they found a place wanting to take him.
"When Abrego Garcia was arrested on March 12, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers didn’t provide a warrant and “told him only that his ‘status had changed,'” according to U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis’ explanation of her April 4 decision that he should be returned from El Salvador. He was shuttled between detainment facilities before being flown to El Salvador on March 15, without having seen a judge."
There's now question whether there was a court order restraint from deporting to El Salvador. The docs I've seen from that immigration case says that there is a hold from deporting to GUATAMALA due to fears for his safety, which is where his family moved to after El Salvador, and where he left to illegally enter the US.And it’s nowhere near as complicated as some here want it to be.
A wanted criminal was deported to his home country who we have an extradition treaty with.
But he’s scared that a rival gang member might want to harm him. Not really our problem.
The Respondent’s application for asylum is time-barred without exception. However, he has established past persecution based on a protected ground, and the presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution. DHS has not shown there are changed circumstances in Guatemala that would result in the Respondent’s life not being threatened, or that internal relocation is possible and reasonable under the circumstances. Therefore, the Respondent’s application for withholding under the Act is granted. Finally, his CAT claim fails because he has not shown that he would suffer torture.”
At present, even though the family has now shut down the pupusa business, Barrio 18 continues to harass and threaten the Respondent’s two sisters and parents in Guatemala. Additionally, they have targeted a brother-in-law who now lives with the family.”
DHS has failed to carry their burden to show that there are changed circumstances in Guatemala that would result in the Respondent’s life not being threatened, or that internal relocation is possible and reasonable. The facts here show that the Barrio 18 gang continues to threaten and harass the Abrego family over these several years, and does so even though the family has moved three times.
Yes. As long as that country agreed to take him
I have heard the ES was actually not the problem but I’ve been too lazy to look as I don’t care because he got what he had coming. Come here legally. Problem solvedThere's now question whether there was a court order restraint from deporting to El Salvador. The docs I've seen from that immigration case says that there is a hold from deporting to GUATAMALA due to fears for his safety, which is where his family moved to after El Salvador, and where he left to illegally enter the US.
![]()
Immigration Judge's 2019 Order Found Kilmar Abrego Garcia 'Subject to Removal' by Deportation But Granted 'Withholding of Removal' to Guatemala, Though Referencing El Salvador - Tennessee Star
The Tennessee Star on Tuesday obtained the final deportation order issued by former U.S. Immigration Judge David M. Jones in 2019, which also granted "withholding of removal" relief, showing the judge appeared to prohibit immigration authorities from deporting Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Guatemala...tennesseestar.com
Ya….hes wanted in ES and we have an extradition treaty with them. It’s in their hands now. Maybe…..maybe, he should not have been deported there but this will not be overturnedAgreed. There seems to be a desire by some to paint him as this wonderful family man who was taken away randomly.
The truth is he was aware that he could be deported.
It’s also insane to be that they barred a gang member from deportation home due to fears of violence against him from his rival gang.
Either way he should be brought back and then deported elsewhere
Yes, the phrase "due process" has 2 words and the word "due" can get overshadowed as in this case.And it’s nowhere near as complicated as some here want it to be.
A wanted criminal was deported to his home country who we have an extradition treaty with.
But he’s scared that a rival gang member might want to harm him. Not really our problem.
This is something I have trouble with. If an American was detained and deported from another country, I would want it to be to the US. I don't want, say, Singapore to send a US citizen to Russia because the American spit on a sidewalk.Yes. As long as that country agreed to take him
AgreedAgreed. There seems to be a desire by some to paint him as this wonderful family man who was taken away randomly.
The truth is he was aware that he could be deported.
It’s also insane to be that they barred a gang member from deportation home due to fears of violence against him from his rival gang.
Either way he should be brought back and then deported elsewhere