Rebecca wrote about this last night: the Supreme Court, which issued an injunction on the deadline regarding the potential retrieval of an illegal alien deported to the wrong country, did indeed order that he be returned to the United States. It was a unanimous decision. It still doesn’t negate that the illegal alien, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, is likely to get re-deported, if he's brought back at all. This matter won't be resolved quickly, especially given how top Trump officials have reacted to this decision. Garcia also has suspected MS-13 ties.
BREAKING: A 9-0 Supreme Court UPHOLDS a court order requiring the Trump administration to bring a Maryland man, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, back to the U.S. after mistakenly deporting him to El Salvador. Deadline TBD. #SCOTUShttps://t.co/bB0HHquFAk pic.twitter.com/vng90OhbL0
— Katie Buehler (@bykatiebuehler) April 10, 2025
NEW: The Supreme Court largely leaves in place an federal judge’s order directing the government to return Kilmar
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) April 10, 2025
Armando Abrego Garcia who is currently being held in a maximum-security prison in El Salvador as a result of a removal the Trump administration concedes was an…
We knew the Left would do backflips about this, but the Court’s language in this ruling is fraught with nuance. It also highlighted the limits of a district court’s power, aptly noting the executive’s purview in the areas of immigration policy and foreign affairs [emphasis mine]:
The application is granted in part and denied in part, subject to the direction of this order. Due to the administrative stay issued by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, the 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. The other 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. 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. For its part, the Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated.
Recommended
That’s a very different take than some say, like ex-Obama aide Jon Favreau, who said, “Supreme Court in a unanimous decision: He has a legal right to be here, and you have to bring him back.”
Supreme Court in a unanimous decision:
— Jon Favreau (@jonfavs) April 10, 2025
He has a legal right to be here, and you have to bring him back https://t.co/NxtRdMJXKN
False. SCOTUS rejected the lower court and made clear that a district court judge cannot exercise Article II foreign affairs powers. The illegal alien terrorist is in the custody and control of a sovereign foreign nation. https://t.co/qbRlM2IxAl
— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) April 11, 2025
Yeah, that's not what the decision said. Embellishing both clauses is such classic Jon.
— Tony Kinnett (@TheTonus) April 11, 2025
Not what they said, ask me how I know you’re not a lawyer
— Will Chamberlain (@willchamberlain) April 10, 2025
No, that’s not what the Court said at all. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller corrected him:
False. SCOTUS rejected the lower court and made clear that a district court judge cannot exercise Article II foreign affairs powers. The illegal alien terrorist is in the custody and control of a sovereign foreign nation.
There will be peak hysterics over this ruling for the next few days.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member