"The relief sought by Plaintiffs is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s instruction requiring this Court to respect the President’s Article II authority to manage foreign policy," says the DOJ brief, "The Court should therefore reject Plaintiffs’ request for further intrusive supervision of the Executive’s facilitation process beyond the daily status reports already ordered." They also note, "Defendants object to the requirement of daily status reports and reserve the right to challenge that requirement further." So, we can expect another fight to erupt over the frequency of case updates to make its way to the Fourth Circuit.

To make the point crystal clear to Judge Xinis, the brief goes on to say, "The Supreme Court explained that on remand, any new order must “clarify” the “scope of the term ‘effectuate,’” in a manner that did not “exceed the District Court’s authority.” The Court instructed that any “directive” must give “due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” And it made clear that any “directive” should concern “Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador” and “ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.”

This is critical because Judge Xinis and the Abrego Garcia's legal team have framed "facilitate" as "bring back to the US." The clear reading of the SCOTUS order is that it was referring to getting him out of prison. The DOJ brief makes it very clear that the administration does not consider "facilitate" to have anything to do with bringing an illegal alien and alleged gang member back to the US: "Defendants understand “facilitate” to mean what that term has long meant in the immigration context, namely actions allowing an alien to enter the United States. Taking “all available steps to facilitate” the return of Abrego Garcia is thus best read as taking all available steps to remove any domestic obstacles that would otherwise impede the alien’s ability to return here. Indeed, no other reading of 'facilitate is tenable—or constitutional—here." //

To make the matter more emphatic, the brief tells the judge that she is mucking about in areas where the Constitution tells her she cannot tread. "They [the plaintiffs] ask this Court to order Defendants to (i) make demands of the El Salvadoran government (A1), (ii) dispatch personnel onto the soil of an independent, sovereign nation (A2), and (iii) send an aircraft into the airspace of a sovereign foreign nation to extract a citizen of that nation from its custody (A3). All of those requested orders involve interactions with a foreign sovereign—and potential violations of that sovereignty. But as explained, a federal court cannot compel the Executive Branch to engage in any mandated act of diplomacy or incursion upon the sovereignty of another nation." All of this is true. Abrego Garcia is a Salvadoran citizen in the custody of the Salvadoran government. The US government has no authority to demand his release, even if it wants to do so. //

The government summarizes the demands made by the plaintiffs this way: "In response, Plaintiffs moved for three categories of relief: (1) an order superintending and micromanaging Defendants’ foreign relations with the independent, sovereign nation of El Salvador, (2) an order allowing expedited discovery and converting Tuesday’s hearing into an evidentiary hearing, and (3) an order to show cause for why Defendants should not be held in contempt. //

Galatians 5:22 Sandy-like the beach I can be
an hour ago
He is a citizen of El Salvador, a foreign nation. He is an MS-13 gang member in the custody of the El Salvadoran government. The United States has no authority to take a foreign citizen in the jail of that foreign citizen's country out of that country. //

1776-2023RIP
an hour ago
That is a lot of legalese and lawyerezing. The co equal Executive Branch should, for the sake of “separation of powers”, “ coequal branches of government “ and for our Constitution, completely ignore ALL district court judges. The Supreme Court is equal to the President. Not superior or “supreme “.
Lesser courts are not even equal.
It is arguable that even the Supreme Court doesn’t have the authority to countermand the President.
The supreme court has been wrong many times before and have been ignored by past presidents. Any conflicts arising between the executive and judicial branches get resolved by the legislative branch. That is our system. We are not to be ruled by edicts by the executive branch, true. But it is just as true that we are not necessarily to be ruled by edicts from the judicial branch either. The executive branch , to preserve executive authority, Must ignore these lower court rulings. Force the Supreme Court to take action. Then proceed from that point.