Trump Is Exploring Ways To ‘Deport’ U.S. Citizens

For those who have never studied the rise of Hitler and the Nazis in Germany, they should do so quickly and, if they do so, I suspect they will see frightening parallels to what we are witnessing in 2025 under the Felon's malignant regime. One hallmark of the Nazis was the manner in which accusations were made against individuals who were then seized, given no due process or trial and then either sent off to concentration camps or simply murdered. Another was the manner in which the press and critics were labeled as enemies of the nation and/or the German people. A third was how a portion of the population shrugged and assumed they were unlike those targeted and safe from the abuses being visited on those labeled as Jews or opponents of the regime. Time proved many of those deliberately blind to what was happening proved their assumption wrong.

In America today, we are seeing foreign students and others being accused of being "terrorists" or as supporters of anti-Semitism seized on the streets by masked individuals and throw into unmarked cars and made to disappear, some in a horrific prison in El Salvador. Now, the Felon has indicated he wants to do the same to American citizens and is defying a unanimous ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court directing the Felon and his regime to return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to the United States. Lawyers for the Department of Justice told a federal court that the administration does not believe it has a legal obligation to return Abrego Garcia to the United States, despite a court order to do so, and even though the government has admitted that its arrest and rendition of Abrego Garcia happened because of “administrative error.” The excuse? He can't be brought back because, in El Salvador, he is outside the jurisdiction of the United States. A piece in The Atlantic looks at the Felon's defiance of the U. S. Supreme Court and what it could mean for American citizens:

Donald Trump took one step closer to openly defying an order from the Supreme Court today—effectively daring the justices to defend the law or pack up and go home.

President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador has emerged as a confederate of Trump’s, accepting planes full of Venezuelan citizens removed from the United States. Last month, the U.S. government deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man living in Maryland with protected legal status. As The Atlantic first reported, the Trump administration acknowledged in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation was “an administrative error”; last week the Supreme Court unanimously ordered the executive branch to “facilitate” his return to the United States.

Since then, the Justice Department has dragged its feet. It has filed required reports to a district court judge late, and has refused to say what it’s doing to bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States. But whether this was defiance or merely delay was unclear until today. In an Oval Office press conference this afternoon, the White House revealed that the answer is defiance—at least for now. Both the U.S. and El Salvador are pretending that they have no power to do anything about Abrego Garcia, a performance of smirking, depraved, and wholly unconvincing absurdity.

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi claimed that Abrego Garcia “was illegally in our country,” despite her own department’s earlier admission of error. The Trump administration also alleged that he’s a gang member, based on a dubious 2019 accusation, but has provided no evidence.

And the idea that Trump couldn’t insist that the friendly leader of a client state return a single man would be an indictment of his abilities as a head of state—if it were true. One might say this leaves Abrego Garcia in a Kafkaesque limbo, but all reports about the Salvadoran prison, the Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo (CECOT), indicate that it’s more of a hell.

American citizens might like to reassure themselves that Abrego Garcia’s case is an outlier involving a Salvadoran citizen; surely they are insulated from such misfortune. But this would be a failure of imagination. First, as I have written, a government that can ignore court rulings in one sphere can ignore them in others, so no one is safe from a lawless government.

Moreover, an American citizen could find themselves in precisely the same vise as Abrego Garcia. During today’s remarks, Trump was asked whether he would be willing to deport American citizens convicted of violent crime to El Salvador. “I’m all for it,” he said. But convictions are overturned all the time. What would happen if an American citizen was found guilty, sent to CECOT, and then had their conviction overturned? We can guess: The White House would insist that they were in Salvadoran custody, beyond the government’s reach. Bukele would shrug and say he had no power to release them.

In their brief, unsigned order about Abrego Garcia last week, the Supreme Court justices seemed to be trying to say as little as possible, and today’s press conference showed how happy the White House has been to take advantage of their brevity and ambiguity. If the Court is unwilling to be more direct, it will surrender any power to act as a check on the other branches of government, thereby allowing authoritarianism.

Meanwhile a piece at Huffington Post looks at Trump's veiled threats to American citizens:

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that President Donald Trump is exploring legal pathways to “deport” U.S. citizens to El Salvador, where the administration has already arranged to house deported immigrants in a prison known for its human rights abuses.

Leavitt suggested the effort would be limited to people who have committed major crimes, but Trump has also mentioned the possibility of sending people who commit lesser offenses abroad.

Any such move on the part of the Trump administration is certain to be challenged in court. It is also not clear what legal authority could be used to justify expelling U.S. citizens from their homeland.

“These would be heinous, violent criminals who have broken our nation’s laws repeatedly. These are violent, repeat offenders on American streets,” Leavitt told reporters at a press briefing.

“The president has said if it’s legal, right, if there is a legal pathway to do that. He’s not sure, [and] we are not sure if there is,” Leavitt continued.

Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday that he “love[s]” the idea of removing U.S. citizens, adding that it would be an “honor” to send them to El Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele — an eager partner in Trump’s schemes.

Trump also proposed the idea in March, when Tesla vehicles were being vandalized and set ablaze in protest of CEO Elon Musk’s heavy-handed involvement in the Trump administration. Musk has been running the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, taking credit for huge cuts to the federal workforce and federal services.

“I look forward to watching the sick terrorist thugs get 20 year jail sentences for what they are doing to Elon Musk and Tesla,” Trump wrote. “Perhaps they could serve them in the prisons of El Salvador, which have become so recently famous for such lovely conditions!”

The administration has argued that housing people in El Salvador saves taxpayer money.

Several planeloads of immigrants flown there last month remain incarcerated as a lawsuit challenging their deportation proceeds through the federal court system. The immigrants, mostly men from Venezuela, were accused of being gang members and deported without the chance to defend themselves. Court documents and reports that have emerged since their removal suggest many believe they will be targeted by the very same gangs Trump has accused them of being affiliated with.

Trump used the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to send the immigrants to El Salvador, officially categorizing the gang Tren de Aragua as a hostile power and the immigrants of being members. It is not clear whether he would attempt to use the same law or a different power to remove citizens.

Critics say the administration’s policy is a clear violation of due process protections enshrined in the Constitution.