obama judge micro manages trump to return illegal abrego garcia

89,385 Views | 1075 Replies | Last: 23 hrs ago by will25u
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:07p, 12/11/25
And... He has been released. Free illegal on way back to Maryland.
Reply Quote
Hubert J. Farnsworth
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 7:41p, 12/11/25
will25u said:
And... He has been released. Free illegal on way back to Maryland.


You've got to be kidding me. So there is no way they can get rid of this illegal? What kind of stupid country are we living in?
Reply Quote
14
1 edit
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jacketman03 • 5:09a, 12/12/25
AG
jacketman03 said:
Ag with kids said:
jacketman03 said:
Ag with kids said:
flown-the-coop said:
And he's been ordered a released again. Never stop Dems, never stop.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-orders-immediate-release-kilmar-abrego-garcia-immigration/story?id=126511576
Quote:
A federal judge has ordered the immediate release of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from immigration detention.

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis said in her order Thursday that "since Abrego Garcia's wrongful detention in El Salvador, he has been re-detained, again without lawful authority."

Xinis said that the absence of a removal order prevents the government from removing Abrego Garcia from the United States.


He has HAD a removal order for years...

Apparently the district judge is too stupid to know that...


He has not had a removal order. The order from 2018 did not order him removed, it said that the US could not remove him to El Salvador.

A removal order has to state where he is being removed to, so where does his removal order at he is to be removed?

No...he HAD a removal order. He had a WITHHOLDING order that wouldn't allow that removal to El Salvador.


You're misunderstanding what a withholding of removal order does. A withholding of removal order says that an alien is removable, but there are reasons to not grant a removal order, so there is no removal order issued. Then, if the government can later show that the conditions that led to the withholding order have been alleviated, the government can then get a removal order.

The fact that a withholding of removal order exists is dispositive proof that there is no removal order.

He was allowed to be removed BUT not to El Salvador.

I guess they don't need a removal order for that...
Reply Quote
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Hubert J. Farnsworth • 5:57a, 12/12/25
AG
Hubert J. Farnsworth said:
will25u said:
And... He has been released. Free illegal on way back to Maryland.


You've got to be kidding me. So there is no way they can get rid of this illegal? What kind of stupid country are we living in?

Oh I think it can be done still, and will happen. Xinis got it wrong that there needed to be a paper in the file saying order of removal etc and that it had to also contain a country to which he should be removed (just fabricating a rule on her own there), but the DoJ failed to appropriately document the Article 2 judge's order for her.

He's still going to be shipped out, this is just more lawfare from an Obama-Biden judge to delay. And a lousy instance of it at that.
Reply Quote
1
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:18a, 12/12/25
AG

Still wearing his Bulls gang-related hat. Hamas scarf behind him.

I hope Dems enjoy the moment. This represents the modern Democrat party perfectly, in a week they also moved toward nominating Jasmine Crockett for the Senate.
Reply Quote
4
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:15p, 12/12/25

Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Colonel Kurtz
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:17p, 12/12/25
AG
Biden imported 50 million illegals and Trump can't even get one (wife-beating felon) of them deported. Just ignore the judges already.
Reply Quote
8
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:24p, 12/12/25
So over the last few days this is what has happened...

1. Xenis says there is no final deportation order, so she releases Garcia...
2. DOJ goes to immigration judge and gets exact order Xenis is looking for. Which was seemingly made up that they needed this specific order. This all in contravention of last 30 years of immigration enforcement.
3. Xenis puts restraining order on government so they can't re-detain him.
Reply Quote
1
Hubert J. Farnsworth
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Colonel Kurtz • 1:25p, 12/12/25
Colonel Kurtz said:
Biden imported 50 million illegals and Trump can't even get one (wife-beating felon) of them deported. Just ignore the judges already.


At this point, I'd be fine with Trump becoming a tyrant over the illegals issue. Ignore the worthless judges and deport them all.
Reply Quote
8
KerrAg76
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Hubert J. Farnsworth • 1:29p, 12/12/25
Yup, time to say FU to the judge and fast track to USSC with her standing in front of the court defending her reasoning
Reply Quote
6
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:51p, 12/12/25
Reply Quote
1
jacketman03
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:41p, 12/12/25
AG
So, if, as everybody seems to be saying, he conceded that he was subject to a removal order, and the government was arguing that there was a removal order, why would the government have gone to a court that no longer has jurisdiction over his immigration case (the IJ denied his motion to reopen, and he appealed it, so his immigration case is currently pending before the BIA) to get a removal order last night?
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jacketman03 • 6:42p, 12/12/25
jacketman03 said:
So, if, as everybody seems to be saying, he conceded that he was subject to a removal order, and the government was arguing that there was a removal order, why would the government have gone to a court that no longer has jurisdiction over his immigration case (the IJ denied his motion to reopen, and he appealed it, so his immigration case is currently pending before the BIA) to get a removal order last night?


I am not well versed here, but it seems that Judge Xinis said there has to be a "Order of Removal" document or something like that. Which doesn't seem to have been the case for the last 30 years. Or whatever she was saying was missing.

So she essentially made up a new requirement for an order of removal.

So the DOJ went back to the IJ and got an "Order of Removal" that judge Xinis said was missing.

Then when they brought that back to her, she put a restraining order on the government saying they can't re-detain him.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jacketman03 • 6:47p, 12/12/25
Reply Quote
2
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jacketman03 • 7:41p, 12/12/25
AG
jacketman03 said:
So, if, as everybody seems to be saying, he conceded that he was subject to a removal order, and the government was arguing that there was a removal order, why would the government have gone to a court that no longer has jurisdiction over his immigration case (the IJ denied his motion to reopen, and he appealed it, so his immigration case is currently pending before the BIA) to get a removal order last night?

Because that ****ing court is erroneously claiming jurisdiction.

And if the DoJ DIDN'T follow through with it, then you'd be screaming bloody murder about Trump being a dictator and ignoring the law.

They're going to appeal. They'll win the appeal. And hopefully, one of the superior courts will slap down some sanctions on this judge for overstepping their bounds...
Reply Quote
5
FTAG 2000
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:57p, 12/12/25
AG
Hear me out. Next time we go to pick him up, have a struggle and put a bullet in him. Enough of this Marxist trash and his little pet judge.

Makes you wonder if ms13 is a tool of the deep state and the DNC.
Reply Quote
11
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jacketman03 • 10:08p, 12/12/25
Who gives a ****? He's a criminal with no right to be here. Get him out! He's worthless.
Reply Quote
5
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ag with kids • 5:13a, 12/13/25
AG
Ag with kids said:
jacketman03 said:
So, if, as everybody seems to be saying, he conceded that he was subject to a removal order, and the government was arguing that there was a removal order, why would the government have gone to a court that no longer has jurisdiction over his immigration case (the IJ denied his motion to reopen, and he appealed it, so his immigration case is currently pending before the BIA) to get a removal order last night?

Because that ****ing court is erroneously claiming jurisdiction.

And if the DoJ DIDN'T follow through with it, then you'd be screaming bloody murder about Trump being a dictator and ignoring the law.

They're going to appeal. They'll win the appeal. And hopefully, one of the superior courts will slap down some sanctions on this judge for overstepping their bounds...

Correct. She's trying to be more clever than she is.

I'm not a subscriber to ship but it might be worth it to read this one.
Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:41p, 12/15/25


Quote:
The consequence of this Court's decision is that Petitioner has no final order of removal. That means he is not presently removable from the United States. But it does not mean he is not subject to any form of detention. If there is no final order of removal, immigration proceedings are ongoing, and Petitioner is subject to pre-final order detention under the separate legal authority in 8 U.S.C. 1225 and/or 1226. This Court's new TRO precluding detention therefore has no legal basis, and must be immediately dissolved.

Indeed, following this Court's order, an IJ has issued a new removal order that includes the language omitted from the 2019 order. As Petitioner acknowledges, that order is not yet final and cannot currently be executed; by its terms, it preserves Petitioner's right to appeal within 30 days to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). If Petitioner has any objection to the new order, the Case 8:25-cv-02780-PX Document 115 Filed 12/14/25 Page 1 of 15 2 BIA is the place to raise those arguments in the first instance; following a BIA appeal, Petitioner can also petition for review in the Court of Appeals. But in the meantime, Petitioner is subject to continued detention while his (renewed) immigration proceedings play out, and this Court has no jurisdiction to indulge a premature collateral attack on the new removal order.

Reply Quote
3
1 edit
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 12:49p, 12/15/25
AG
The language not included in the 2019 removal order was/is not required and he should still be facing immediate detention/removal as such as well.
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:30a, 12/22/25

Reply Quote
Get Off My Lawn
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 11:54a, 12/22/25
I fail to understand how "vindictive prosecution" would apply when an illegal is actively fighting deportation.

I get that the left is immoral and will grasp at any tenuous excuse available, but functional outcome would be a policy where illegals need only publicly thumb their nose at ICE to obtain immunity from deportation.

And again - I get that the left is actively working to break the system - but this is so flimsy that any judge who entertains these claims should be immediately impeached, removed, and themselves prosecuted for aiding and abetting.
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:50p, 12/22/25
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:04p, 12/23/25
??? Why?

Reply Quote
2
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:07p, 12/23/25
AG
Judges usually don't file anything under seal unless they are asked to do so. So what is happening here?
Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:15p, 12/23/25
Reply Quote
1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.