Fascism watch thread/news and discussions

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

What to do if the Insurrection Act is invoked

https://wagingnonviolence.org/2025/04/w ... s-invoked/

[firestar464]

Bloomberg- ICE chief says deportation system should run like Amazon Prime

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2025/ ... zon-prime/

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

Thread

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

Trump and RFK Jr. Are Destroying a Generation of Knowledge

https://www.thenation.com/article/socie ... lth-purge/

[firestar464]

tldr the judge wants daily status updates on what the feds are doing to bring Garcia back (also she wants his location)

[firestar464]

[firestar464]

[caltrek]

Is Stephen Miller even writing about the Khalil case? His description certainly doesn't seem to fit Kahlil:

Mahmoud Khalil Can Be Deported, Immigration Judge Rules
by Sophie Hurwirtz
April 11, 2025

Introduction:

(Mother Jones) A Louisiana immigration judge ruled Friday that recent Columbia graduate and Palestine activist Mahmoud Khalil can be deported—even though Khalil has a green card, is a lawful permanent resident, and has not been charged with any crimes.

The judge gave Khalil’s attorneys until April 23 to ask for a stay of the deportation. There is a separate case in federal court in New Jersey still ongoing over whether Khalil’s arrest on March 8th violated his First Amendment rights.

The rationale for deporting Khalil is obscure. Secretary of State Marco Rubio submitted a two-page letter arguing, essentially, that Khalil is deportable on the basis of ideas: his “past, current, or expected beliefs.” Rubio relied on a 1950s law that says the Secretary of State can determine whether a noncitizen’s presence in the US harms national security goals.

The US, following the Trump administration’s executive order on antisemitism, has said Khalil—and other pro-Palestine activists—are harming the US goal of combatting antisemitism. Immigration judge Jamee Coman said she has no authority to question the Secretary of State.

In Rubio’s letter to the court, released by the Associated Press on Thursday, he asserts that Khalil’s alleged beliefs mean his continued in the country “would compromise a compelling US foreign policy interest.”

Read more here: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2 ... uisiana/

caltrek’s comment: Nothing there about Khalil being a terrorist. Just that the Trump administration doesn’t like his pro-Palestinian political opinions.

Also, Khalil is facing deportation. If I understand the situation correctly, he is still in the United States. Further his case has not made it to the Supreme Court.

Finally, I presume there is a difference between and Immigration Judge and a District Court judge.

If Stephen Miller is not writing about Khalil, then who in the hell is he writing about?

[caltrek]

Perhaps Stephen Miller was writing about the Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia case?

Except that no convincing evidence has been presented that Garcia is a "terrorist." Rather, he was apparently deported and is now held in prison in El Salvador due to an "administrative error." Further, the Supreme Court let stand, in part, the lower court's ruling.

Supreme Court Unanimously Orders Trump To 'Facilitate' the Return of Wrongly Deported Man
by Damon Root
April 11, 2025

Introduction:

(Mother Jones) For the second time in a week, all nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court have rejected a sweeping assertion of executive power made by President Donald Trump in a case arising from Trump's unilateral efforts to deport aliens from the United States.

The first rejection came on April 7, when the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that all deportees under the Alien Enemies Act must be afforded due process of law, including "notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal." That was a clear repudiation of Trump's claim that the Alien Enemies Act allowed him to summarily deport alleged members of a Venezuelan street gang without due process and judicial review. But as Justice Brett Kavanaugh observed in concurrence in Trump v. J.G.G., "all nine Members of the Court agree that judicial review is available."

The second rejection came on April 10, when a unanimous Supreme Court let stand, in part, a lower court order which directed the Trump administration to "facilitate and effectuate the return…to the United States" of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a man whom the U.S. government admitted to unlawfully deporting to a Salvadoran prison because of an "administrative error."

The Trump administration responded to the lower court's order by claiming that the attorney general's decision to remove Abrego Garcia, even when made in error, could not be subjected to judicial review. The administration further claimed that "an injunction demanding the release and return of an alien from a foreign sovereign violates Article II," which is another way of saying the lower court exceeded its proper judicial authority by trespassing on the core powers of the president.

According to the Supreme Court's unsigned order in Noem v. Abrego Garcia, however, the district court's order "properly requires the Government to 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador." In other words, Trump failed in his attempt to evade judicial review in this matter.

Read more here: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politic ... AA1CL9QR

[firestar464]

Tbh the word "terrorist" is utterly meaningless at this point when used by members of the Trump admin

[caltrek]

To understand the case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, I have provided a link to the text of the Supreme Court decision:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/24A949

Note that the decision does include the observation that "The United States represents that the removal (of Kilmar Garcia) to El Salvador was the result of an 'administrative error.'”

Per Stephen Miller's allegation that Garcia is a terrorist, the court also notes that: "The United States alleges, however, that Abrego Garcia has been found to be a member of the gang MS–13, a designated foreign terrorist organization, and that his return to the United States would pose a threat to the public."

No establishment of guilt through any judicial procedure, just an allegation with no real evidence yet provided to support that allegation.

I mentioned earlier that the lower court ruling had been upheld in part. So, what was upheld and what was not upheld?

"(T)he deadline imposed by the District Court has now passed. To that extent, the Government’s emergency application is effectively granted in part and the deadline in the challenged order is no longer effective. The rest of the District Court’s order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand."

So, the deadline was not upheld as it had already passed. All other aspects were upheld with the qualification that "clarification on remand" is needed.

Clarification regarding what issue or issues?

"The intended scope of the term 'effectuate' in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs."
Hence Miller's reference to the court making "clear that a district court judge cannot exercise Article II foreign affairs powers”?

Yet, Miller ignores that the court also indicated that district court order "properly requires the Government to 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador."

Apparently, Miler is quite comfortable with Garcia remaining in a prison in El Salvador without any due process whatsoever that would establish that he is a terrorist.

One wonders, does he even care about providing due process to determine whether a detainee is a citizen?

Clearly, the answer to that question points to whether the government seeks to operate according to fascist principles.

As to "Constitutional crisis." Is the government going to “facilitate” Garcia’s release, or is it going to simply ignore the courts’ rulings in this regard?

As I understand it, that is the basis for fearing as “Constitutional crisis.” Miller’s selective take on the situation is not encouraging. (I presume that this is the same Stephen Miller that is serving as the 12th United States homeland security advisor and White House deputy chief of staff).

[caltrek]

Well, that certainly isn't encouraging as to whether the Trump administration will comply with the court order as regards to the Garcia case.

[firestar464]

[caltrek]

'Defiant Screw You': Trump Administration 'Thumbs its Nose' at Supreme Court
by David McAfee
April 13, 2025

Introduction:

(Raw Story) Donald Trump's Department of Justice just "thumbed its nose at the Supreme Court," experts say.

The Trump Administration over the weekend filed multiple briefs in the case involving Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant who lived in the U.S. legally with a work permit and was erroneously deported to El Salvador. A day earlier, the Trump Administration confirmed that the man is alive but didn't provide many details.

In the new filings, the Trump administration "says it has no updates" for Judge Xinis about the "efforts to facilitate" the return of the wrongly deported man, according to Politico's Kyle Cheney.

Additional extract:

The filings also claim that the Supreme Court's recent ruling "doesn't compel it to actually seek" the man's release from the prison, and instead only requires the government "to let him into US if he manages to get out," according to fellow Politico reporter Josh Gerstein.

Read more here: https://www.rawstory.com/trump-defiant ... -court/

[caltrek]

'Full-Blown Constitutional Crisis' Deepens as Bukele Refuses to Release Maryland Resident
by Julia Conley
April 14, 2025

Introduction:

(Common Dreams) "Everyone here is pretending," said immigration policy expert Aaron Reichlin-Melnick as a video of Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele speaking in the Oval Office circulated on Monday.

Bukele, said the senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, was pretending "that he's incapable of releasing" Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident whom the Trump administration expelled to El Salvador's Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) in March, while President Donald Trump continued to pretend he's unable to demand Abrego Garcia's release.

When reporters asked Bukele to weigh in on Abrego Garcia's case, the Salvadoran leader scoffed.

"Of course you're not suggesting that I smuggle a terrorist into the United States," he said. "How can I return him to the United States, do I smuggle him into the United States? ...I don't have the power to return him to the United States."

Read more here: https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-bukele