Yet here’s the Trump administration under unduly extreme fire. This cannot be separated from their previous illegal refusal to return Salvadorian national Kilmar Ábrego García to the U.S. This decision willfully circumvents a lawfully entered court order requiring his return. It ignores a Supreme Court ruling that said the Trump administration must act on this. Ábrego García’s deportation last month has already been admitted by the administration to be an “administrative error.”
In 2019, an immigration judge granted Ábrego García asylum from deportation. In addition, the judge said that he would be subjected to retaliation if he were to go back to El Salvador. This ruling has become a touchstone to the broader debate that has continued about his case. This is why critics say the administration’s refusal to act is a violation of judicial power. This should raise profound concerns about this Administration’s devotion to the rule of law.
Democratic leaders have rallied around Ábrego García’s case, using it as a symbol of what they describe as the reckless approach to immigration enforcement under President Trump. They contend that the failure to adhere to court orders jeopardizes the rule of law and democratic norms.
Cory Booker, a prominent senator, emphasized the urgency of the situation, stating:
“The Supreme Court was clear: the Trump administration must act to facilitate the return of Kilmar Ábrego García to the United States. There is no room for debate – yet Trump is refusing, in defiance of a lawful court order.”
Booker echoed calls for nondiscriminatory bipartisan legislative support, inviting every member of Congress to stand on the side of constitutional values.
“Every member of Congress should be standing up for the Constitution and demanding that the administration act to return Mr. Ábrego García to the U.S. and to his family.”
This administration has already gotten plenty of justified criticism over the handling of this case. Aside from the above, its sweeping immigration policies have received widespread criticism. Local officials charge that state Democratic lawmakers were placing the interests of undocumented immigrants above those of U.S. citizens. They present this disingenuous argument as a fight for American values.
Everything just got a lot more complicated. The government of El Salvador has rebuffed repeated U.S. officials’ requests for meetings to discuss the case of Ábrego García. This denial further complicates efforts to litigate his case out of the lien. It further bars him from going back to the country where he enjoys legal protection.
That too is changing quickly. Far from addressing those concerns, the administration’s own response to such pressure remains murky, but should be informed by the desire of lawmakers and advocates for justice for Ábrego García. His case illustrates profound contradictions at the heart of our current immigration regime. Even more importantly, it raises profound questions about how court orders can be enforced in the first place.