The Noemites tonight argue that they have effectively put Abrego Garcia into a "Catch 22" / no-mans' land: They say he has no "final order" -- from which to appeal -- and yet, these same Noemites claim they (and they alone) may crate new orders to remove him (to Liberia, for example) -- without even allowing him the right to oppose them. That is a simply preposterous inversion of our laws -- long standing and free from serious dispute, for over a half-century.
But indeed, here we are: the Noemites increasingly claim "brown shirter" powers they (and all their US forebears) have NEVER possessed -- here's that, from Mr. Hecker's portion of today's joint status update:
. . .[L]ate in the afternoon on December 17, 2025, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed Abrego Garcia’s appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of his motion to reopen, reasoning that because the immigration judge’s December 11, 2025 order amended the October 10, 2019 decision, “the Immigration Judge’s October 10, 2019, order is not final” and therefore “the respondent’s motion to reopen is moot.” Ex. 1 (B.I.A. Dec. 17, 2025).
The events described above, when taken alongside the Government’s conduct throughout this case, illustrate why the preliminary injunction remains essential. As this Court has already recognized, “even if Abrego Garcia could have been lawfully removed to a third country, Respondents do not appear to have held him to fulfill that purpose. For if they had wished to remove him, they certainly could have as early as August 21, 2025, to Costa Rica. And even if the Court accords Respondents a measure of deference in exercising their discretion to favor another country, ‘discretion’ cannot explain what happened next.” ECF 110 at 28.
The Government’s recent conduct follows this same troubling pattern, and Abrego Garcia should have the opportunity to fully address Respondents’ arguments in briefing and at oral argument. . . .
Indeed. Now you know. Onward, resolutely.
नमस्ते
1 comment:
And this little bit out of Nashville, tonight is trivial, so we drop it into comments. Mr. Abrego Garcia has (in the possession of his counsel, Mr. Hecker) an EXPIRED Salvadoran passport.
The USDC Judge Waverly Crenshaw, for the MDTN court, with the US Attorney's blessing -- will now allow him to get a valid, current Salvadoran passport (from which he may in the future obtain a Costa Rican one, for example) -- should he decide to self-deport, rather than deal with any more Noemite nonsense (until Trumpian time is over):
...COMES NOW the United States of America, by and through Robert E. McGuire, Acting United States Attorney, and submits the following Response to the Defendant’s Motion to Modify Pre-trial Conditions. (DE # 268.) The Government does not oppose the Motion so long as the Court’s order specifically directs the release of the Defendant’s expired passport from Pre-trial Services to an attorney for the Defendant, requires the Defendant to provide the newly valid passport to his attorney immediately upon his receipt of same, and requires that the Defendant’s attorney provide it directly to Pre-trial Services as expeditiously as possible upon their receipt.
This way, the status quo will be maintained which is that the Defendant will not have immediate, direct access to a passport while also allowing the Defendant to acquire a new passport for the reasons described in the Defendant’s Motion....
Now you know.
Post a Comment