143 Comments
User's avatar
Jonathan Meyer's avatar

Thank you for taking the time on a busy weekend to clarify these crazy times for us!

Ellen Bender's avatar

Thanks for this explanation that I read before I finished my morning coffee. I upgraded to paid because I have a feeling you'll be staying up late to do more of these.

Marvin Beshore's avatar

Ditto.

Hope Ratner's avatar

Ditto!

Karen Vladeck's avatar

Hopefully not too late 🤣

Melissa Sherrod's avatar

So did I.

Drea's avatar

Excellent development for now. Thank you for discussing in depth.

Ashley's avatar

Thank you for this explanation. Even as someone who doesn’t understand much legalese, this helped me further conceptualize the important matter at hand. Thank you!

Robert Beatty's avatar

Understanding the intricacies of Calvinball and its Zen-like implications (there are no answers or logic, but keep searching) is absolutely crucial to understanding how the Trump DOJ operates.

Seth Hathaway's avatar

Steve, thanks. So, SCOTUS IS he cavalry, and they ARE coming? Trump (finally) is hoisted on his own petard? Deus ex machina? Stephen Miller is in (legal) comtempt? Enquiring minds want to know. (Where is Paul Harvey when you need him?)

PipandJoe's avatar

You seem to have anticipated our need to know and that it would also be a comfort to us, so thank you!

Any possible vagueness is being used by the administration to fuzzy the lines of compliance and spin a narrative of excuses that is being picked up by right-wing media. The longer that goes on, the less a significant portion of the public will notice when the line is fully crossed having been numbed to it, in my personal view. Even those of us in a panic and aware, have felt the fuzziness.

This all needs to be made crystal clear. No supple branch being bent, but if this line is crossed, it needs to shatter like breaking glass and everyone needs to know.

I am glad SCOTUS has made this decision clear.

Paul's avatar

Wow. Great reporting here. (Although I have to admit I had to reread everything after the calvinball reference, as my mind wandered to C&H’s original game). Great way to start my day!

Bill Mac's avatar

Many thanks for the early morning facts/analysis/clarity.

[I had to google Calvinball.]

Carol Parsons's avatar

So you’re not going to tell us what it is?! I have to Google it myself???? HA, ok after my 2nd cup of coffee maybe😍

Christine's avatar

Here ya go: Noun. Calvinball (uncountable) (games) A deliberately absurd sport without fixed rules.

Carol Ray's avatar

How is it possible not to know Calvinball? Too young?

Jim Lewis's avatar

On one level, I appreciated the Calvinball reference. On the other hand, its initial use in Calvin and Hobbes reflected a more joyful absurdity that is … not present here.

SteveG's avatar

Thank you Prof. This is the kind of irt analysis that prompted me to become a founding member this morning. Your ability to read between the lines by providing context is invaluable as we see if the Courts remain an equal branch of government. Btw, is it noteworthy that the DOJ has not, to my knowledge, filed a stay/mandamus emergency motion from Judge Wilkerson’s opinion in KAB? SteveG

Steve Vladeck's avatar

Thanks Steve. I'm not sure exactly what to make yet of DOJ's maneuvering in Abrego Garcia, but yes, no filing at SCOTUS yet suggests at least some ... pause ... on its part.

Kate McMahon's avatar

Thank you as always! (You must be exhausted). One question re: the AEA on the merits. Suppose the court found the govt can apply it to suspected gang members. I understand then that the AEA would give them power to detain and/or deport. But does it give them the right to deport and continue to detain? Isn’t there a separate legal question here about the ability to detain AEA prisoners after they’ve been deported? From a due process perspective, the deportation seems to be the least of it if they’re being deported to then serve a life sentence

Sara Olsen's avatar

If not a slow death sentence, effectively, by being worked or mistreated to death

Jim Lewis's avatar

Yes, I’m hoping a court will address this sooner rather than later — particularly when we are paying for the life sentence in the destination country, and thus controlling the outcome. Could we also pay another country to summarily execute the people we round up and deport?

Steve Vladeck's avatar

Yes--there are a raft of second-generation questions even if the AEA can lawfully be invoked against TdA.

Danielle Dehr's avatar

Thanks for this, Steve. Your work is important and meaningful.

Rick Geissal's avatar

This is very informative, Steve, and I admire the speed with which you authored it! Appreciate ya.

Katie's avatar

So glad to wake this morning to your missive suggesting that we may have cause for HOPE! Now if only the Trump administration could manage the third and greatest of things that remain: Corinthians 13:13. "And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love; but the greatest of these is love".

AG's avatar

Thank you! Do you think there is a risk that the government will try to get around the Court's order by sending people to El Salvador based on the "Rubio memo" instead of the AEA?

Steve Vladeck's avatar

No, because the approach in cases like Khalil can't be used to end-run ordinary judicial review. The whole premise of trying to use the AEA was to try to get around exactly that...

John Mitchell's avatar

What exactly is the "putative class" mentioned in the Supreme Court's order? Is it all illegal Venezuelan immigrants whom the Trump administration claims it can remove under the AEA? Or is it just some subset of that group?

Steve Vladeck's avatar

According to the complaint, it's any non-citizen who is (1) covered by Trump's Alien Enemy Act proclamation and (2) was, is, or will be detained in the Northern District of Texas. So it's not nationwide.

John Mitchell's avatar

Thanks for the reply.

Too bad it's not nationwide. In that case, I expect that the Trump administration will try to quickly deport Venezuelans who are detained elsewhere. If moving the detainees from the Northern District of Texas to another location and then deporting them would not formally violate the court's order, they may do that, too. They'll clearly use every trick they can think of.

AG's avatar

I have a vague memory of the government asserting that some of those on the March 15 flights in JGG were being "removed" under the authority of ... something other than the AEA (not under the Rubio memo, I guess, but ... pursuant to the president's inherent foreign policy powers, or some amorphous concept like that). Could be that I was hallucinating!!

In any event, thanks so much for keeping us informed & helping us understand this!

~Anne G

Rebecca Bartlett's avatar

Now we know what it takes to light a SCOTUS justice's hair on fire.

Geoff G's avatar

I thought the old Duder's head had a lot of strands in it but he's got nothing on you. This was remarkably easy to follow, but I still hope none of it is going to be on the exam.

Carol Parsons's avatar

Oh no, there’s an exam??!!!😟