Federal appeals court denies emergency stay to Trump administration in wrongful deportation case – JURIST

In yet another development within a one-week period in the wrongful deportation case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on Thursday denied the Trump administration’s request for an emergency stay of a lower court order demanding Garcia’s return. Including the Supreme Court, this is now the third federal court to deliver yet another blow to the Trump administration in the Garcia case.

Prior to this development, the Supreme Court on April 10 denied the federal government’s request to vacate that very same order. The following day, Judge Paula Xinis of the said lower court ordered the government to provide daily updates on Garcia’s location and the government’s facilitation efforts. Xinis stated that she imposed this requirement because the Trump administration failed to provide proper updates as previously ordered.

Then on Monday, President Donald Trump’s advisers, together with El Salvador President Nayib Bukele, took the position that neither the US nor Bukele had the requisite authority to return Garcia. This was followed by yet another order on Tuesday from Xinis demanding sworn testimonies from Trump administration officials regarding efforts taken by them to comply with her order the previous week. That order authorized Garcia’s lawyers to depose various officials from the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security.

This order from the Fourth Circuit relates to Xinis’s original order earlier this month on which the Justice Department had requested an emergency stay pending appeal and a writ of mandamus. The Fourth Circuit denied both requests stating that it will “not micromanage the efforts of a fine district judge attempting to implement the Supreme Court’s recent decision.” In what appears to be a similar chiding of the federal government as with Xinis’s original order, the Fourth Circuit added:

The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done.

This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear. The government asserts that Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS-13. Perhaps, but perhaps not. Regardless, he is still entitled to due process. If the government is confident of its position, it should be assured that position will prevail in proceedings to terminate the withholding of removal order…

Today, both the United States and the El Salvadoran governments disclaim any authority and/or responsibility to return Abrego Garcia…We are told that neither government has the power to act. The result will be to leave matters generally and Abrego Garcia specifically in an interminable limbo without recourse to law of any sort.

The basic differences between the branches mandate a serious effort at mutual respect. The respect that courts must accord the Executive must be reciprocated by the Executive’s respect for the courts. Too often today this has not been the case, as calls for impeachment of judges for decisions the Executive disfavors and exhortations to disregard court orders sadly illustrate…

The court also reminded the executive branch of its obligation to respect the rule of law and referred back to former President Dwight Eisenhower’s decision to enforce the Supreme Court’s rulings in Brown v Board of Education to desegregate schools “with all deliberate speed,” despite his personal views on the matter.