Side of the Supreme Court with erroneous migrant deported

On Thursday the Supreme Court commissioned the government to take measures to return a Salvadoran migrant who had mistakenly deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador.

In An unprecedented orderThe Court has stopped ordering the return of the migrant, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, indicating that the courts may not have the power to request the executive branch of doing it.

But the Court approved part of the order of the trial judge who had requested the government to “facilitate and return” by Mr. Abrego Garcia.

“The order correctly requires the government to” facilitate “the release of Abrego Garcia by the custody of El Salvador and to ensure that his case was managed as it would have been if he had not been sent improperly to El Salvador,” said the Supreme Court sentence. “The planned scope of the term” to make “in the order of the district court is, however, unclear and can exceed the authority of the district court”.

The case will now return to the Court and it is not clear if and when Mr. Abrego Garcia will be returned to the United States.

“The district court should clarify its directive, with due regard to the deference due to the executive branch in the conduct of foreign affairs,” said the sentence of the Supreme Court. “For his part, the government should be ready to share what can concern the steps he has adopted and the prospect of further measures.”

The sentence seemed to be unanimous. But judge Sonia Sotomayor, joined by the judges Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, issued a declaration that was severely critical of the government conduct and said he would support every part of the order of the trial judge.

“To date,” wrote the judge Sotomayor, “the government has not mentioned any legal base for the arrest without a guarantee of Abrego Garcia, his removal of El Salvador or his confinement in a prison of Salvadoregna. Nor could it be.”

Judge Sotomayor urged the judge of the trial, Paula Xinis of the federal district court in Maryland, to “continue to guarantee that the government is up to its obligations to follow the law”.

Andrew J. Rossman, one of Abrego Garcia’s lawyers, expressed satisfaction with the action of the Supreme Court.

“The rule of law won today,” he said. “It’s time to take him home.”

Judge Xinis had said that the Trump administration made a “serious mistake” that “shocked the conscience” by sending Mr. Abrego Garcia to El Salvador despite a 2019 sentence from a judge of immigration. The judge of immigration has granted him a special status known as “holding from the removal”, discovering that he could face violence or torture if sent to El Salvador.

The administration claims that Abrego Garcia, 29, is a member of a violent transnational road band, MS-13, which officials have recently designated as a terrorist organization.

Judge Xinis, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said that these statements were based on “a singular non -proven charge”.

“The” tests “against Abrego Garcia consisted of anything but his hat and the Chicago Bulls sweatshirt”, he wrote, “and a vague accusation and not corroborated by a confidential informant who stated that he belonged to the” western “clique of MS-13 in New York-A place where he never lived”.

In the Administration emergency application Trying to block the order of judge Xinis, D. John Sauer, the prosecutor General of the United States, said he had passed his authority by committing himself in the “diplomacy of the District Camp”, because he would require working with the government of El Salvador to guarantee the release of Mr. Abrego Garcia.

“If this precedent stands,” he wrote, “other district courts could order the United States to successfully negotiate the return of other aliens removed anywhere in the world at the end of the business,” he wrote. “Under that logical, the district courts actually would have the extraterritorial jurisdiction on the diplomatic relations of the United States with the whole world.”

In an answer In court, Abrego Garcia’s lawyers said that their client “is located in a foreign prison exclusively at the behest of the United States, as a product of a Kafka -style error”.

They added: “The order of the district court that instructs the government to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia is routine. It does not imply a foreign policy or even the internal immigration policy in any case.”

Sauer said that he didn’t matter that an immigration judge had previously prohibited Abrego Garcia’s deportation to El Salvador.

“While the United States admit that the removal of El Salvador was an administrative error,” Sauer wrote, “who does not authorize the district courts to grasp control over foreign relations, treat the executive branch as a subordinate diplomat and ask that the United States have left a member of a foreign terrorist organization in America tonight”.

The lawyers of Mr. Abrego Garcia said that there were no evidence that he had placed a risk.

“Abrego Garcia has lived freely in the United States for years, but has never been accused of a crime,” they wrote. “The thesis of the government that suddenly turned into a dangerous threat to the Republic is not credible”.

Sauer said that the order of judge Xinis was one of a series of judgments from the courts that have passed their constitutional authority.

“It is the last of a litany of injunctions or temporary restriction orders from the same handful of district courts that require immediate or almost immediate conformity, on absurdly short deadlines,” he wrote.

In his declaration on Thursday, the judge Sotomayor wrote that it would have been shameful “to leave Abrego Garcia, husband and father unprecedented criminals, in a prison Salvadoran for no reason recognized by the law”.

He added that the position of the government “implies that he could expel and implement any person, including US citizens, without legal consequences, provided that he does it before a court can intervene”.

“This opinion” wrote justice. “We refute.”