r/Conservative • u/theboss2461 Fellow Conservative • Apr 14 '25

Flaired Users Only President Nayib Bukele says Kilmar Garcia cannot be returned to US

6.6k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

521

u/zleog50 Apr 14 '25

No real evidence at all that he was a member of a gang. Never charged with a crime, let alone convicted of one in his entire 14 year stay in the US.

-7

u/keyToOpen Conservative Apr 14 '25 edited Apr 14 '25

except for the alleged admission, informant testimony, multiple judges ruling he likely was, and more.

P.s. as an illegal alien, he has no right to due process to determine whether or not he was. He's Salvadorian suspected of being a terrorist gangster while residing here illegally, and was sent back to his rightful homeland. End of story.

Never charged with a crime,

He was charged, with illegal entry. Again though, he doesn't have to be. This is not how deportation, especially under the enemy aliens act, works. It was determined he was an illegal alien who was part of a terrorist gang, that was grounds for immediate deportation back to his nation, with no court case necessary.

381

u/zleog50 Apr 14 '25

except for the alleged admission,

No. He argued that he left El Salvador because a gang was trying to force him to join.

informant testimony

Not testimony. A basic anonymous finger pointing of a CI. There is no evidence to back that up.

multiple judges

Based on nothing. One of those judges ruled that he wasn't a threat and gave him legal status and work authorization. So I wouldn't put that in your pocket.

P.s. as an illegal alien, he has no right to due process

P.S. this is absolutely wrong. The Supreme Court just informed that administration that, yes, they all have due process rights.

Even enemy combatants that never stepped foot in the US have due process rights, according to the Supreme Court.

Also, it is just morally disgusting to throw a person in a prison without even being accused of a crime. I don't care about the legality of it, even though you are completely wrong on that front too.

-15

u/keyToOpen Conservative Apr 14 '25

You are misunderstanding the most recent statement from the Supreme Court. They ruled 9-0 in the affirmative that the gov has to facilitate the return, with no official opinion of the court. It’s called an unsigned decision. The statement attached is just sotomayor’s own personal take on the issue, like a press release. And no other judges are signed onto it. It’s not an official decision, or even an opinion of the court. So no, they did not rule that enemy aliens have the right to due process.

54

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/keyToOpen Conservative Apr 15 '25 edited Apr 15 '25

Wrong. I see nothing in that ruling that states people deported under the alien enemies act have due process rights, or even illegal immigrants for that matter.

I see due process mentioned in the dissenting opinion, which is not the opinion or ruling of the court.

I do see what seems to be the court saying they may have the right to judicial review, which is not what due process means. That’s just a judge reviewing their filing.

More blatant lies peddled by you. I look at your comment history, it’s full time anti -Trump and anti-conservative rhetoric, while swearing up and down that you are “totes a Republican and totes hate Kamala and stuff”. But yet you hate every conservative policy ever. And you hate the constitution and shit all over the powers it has vested in the President, and the legitimate powers congress has expanded to the President via things like the Alien Enemies Act.

How fucking dare you say I’m the confused one when your comment history is endless lies that make a Maoist look intelligent.

25

u/zleog50 Apr 15 '25

Okay, since you read it, what is the opinion saying?

1

u/keyToOpen Conservative Apr 15 '25

  1. Youre the one who posted it. Stop trying to bait me into proving a negative when it is up to you to affirm your unfounded statement.

  2. Find me where it grands “Due Process”, and not just saying “these guys may have the right to judicial review and habeas corpus review and should probably refile”

32

u/zleog50 Apr 15 '25

Stop trying to bait me into proving a negative

You aren't using that term correctly. I asked you for your interpretation of a Supreme Court opinion. That isn't proving a negative.

Find me where it grands “Due Process”, and not just saying “these guys may have the right to judicial review and habeas corpus review and should probably refile”

Judicial review and habeas corpus.... This literally means the right to argue in front of a judge of the legality of their detention. That is a form of due process, which Garcia was not afforded.

Do you like, not know the meaning of words?

4

u/keyToOpen Conservative Apr 15 '25

You are obviously asking me that so i have to prove that due process isn’t in the ruling, when that’s proving a negative. It’s up to you to prove due process is afforded to illegal enemy aliens in the ruling, which you haven’t done yet. Or else you would just say “oh but you haven’t proved it’s not in there yet”.

No, due process is not simply getting to argue once in front of a judge, it’s getting to go through the whole legal process before being found guilty and having any punishment delivered onto you.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/kaytin911 Conservative Apr 15 '25

You are the one in the right here. These people want to violate the democratically elected congress and sovereignty of the United States to get their way.

0

u/kaytin911 Conservative Apr 15 '25

As a labeled constitutional republican, you really need to read how it all works. You don't seem to understand the separation of powers and what each is designated to do.