Friday's news in the Khalil and Abrego Garcia cases underscores both the role courts can play in checking immigration abuses and the limits they often confront.
If this was really Kagan's first solo dissent, that's a bit striking. Why did she pick this case?
I did not watch the Garfield series, not having the channel, but I did try to read the book it apparently was based on. I couldn't get into the whole thing. It was too diffuse for me. Oh well.
Thank you for your update on these two very troubling cases.
If your time permits, please write about the origin of immigration courts which, if I am correct, were created by statute and were placed under DOJ in the executive branch. How can individuals such as Khalil and Abrego be assured of fair treatment when challenging executive branch action? I think lawyers and judges (generally speaking) are saving our country right now, but placing "courts" in the executive branch (DOJ and agencies) violates the separation of powers, doesn't it? As these two cases illustrate, this arrangement jeopardizes the principle of fair and impartial treatment.
Great commentary, as always, but I do have a few nits to pick.
Granted that this administration is stripping immigration courts of the independence Congress intended, a very significant development, I would nonetheless ask you to reconsider your choice to use quotation marks for those courts and their judges.
Also, Tennessee is in the Mississippi watershed and is not part of the eastern seaboard, and certainly not the middle district.
"Abrego Garcia as the symbol of mass removals to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) based upon invented facts and in defiance of a prior order specifically barring his removal to El Salvador."
Please give us a succinct short paragraph explaining what you just wrote hundreds/thousands of words about.
tl;dr!
If this was really Kagan's first solo dissent, that's a bit striking. Why did she pick this case?
I did not watch the Garfield series, not having the channel, but I did try to read the book it apparently was based on. I couldn't get into the whole thing. It was too diffuse for me. Oh well.
Thank you for your update on these two very troubling cases.
If your time permits, please write about the origin of immigration courts which, if I am correct, were created by statute and were placed under DOJ in the executive branch. How can individuals such as Khalil and Abrego be assured of fair treatment when challenging executive branch action? I think lawyers and judges (generally speaking) are saving our country right now, but placing "courts" in the executive branch (DOJ and agencies) violates the separation of powers, doesn't it? As these two cases illustrate, this arrangement jeopardizes the principle of fair and impartial treatment.
Great commentary, as always, but I do have a few nits to pick.
Granted that this administration is stripping immigration courts of the independence Congress intended, a very significant development, I would nonetheless ask you to reconsider your choice to use quotation marks for those courts and their judges.
Also, Tennessee is in the Mississippi watershed and is not part of the eastern seaboard, and certainly not the middle district.
"Abrego Garcia as the symbol of mass removals to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) based upon invented facts and in defiance of a prior order specifically barring his removal to El Salvador."
Invented facts = lies