Are we now in a constitutional crisis? Has push come to shove over a Venezuelan deportee?updated: 4/17,2025

Update 4/18/2025 GOP Judge Darkly Warns Of Last Chance To Avoid Tyranny   The appeals court rejected the Trump administration appeal in the case of the wrongly deported Abrego-Garcia: The ruling is also a wakeup call: 

“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.” “If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home?” “Now the branches come too close to grinding irrevocably against one another in a conflict that promises to diminish both.” “The Executive may succeed for a time in weakening the courts, but over time history will script the tragic gap between what was and all that might have been, and law in time will sign its epitaph.” The whole order is worth your time. Share The Deportation-Big Data Industrial Complex A leak from inside Palantir to 404 Media shows the high tech surveillance company is assisting ICE with locating migrants targeted for deportation. In possibly related news: Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, who is now serving as de facto chief of staff to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, told DHS officials to give Palantir additional work after he organized a tour for Noem of a Palantir facility, the WSJ reports: Weeks after the tour, the company co-founded by Peter Thiel would get an additional $29.9 million from the agency under an existing contract—specifically to deploy its powerful software for immigration “targeting and enforcement” and “self-deportation tracking,” records show. Lewandowski has no formal position at DHS but “he has used his close relationship with Noem to wield power” in his role as a “special government employee,” the WSJ noted. The Deportation-Higher Ed Industrial Complex At least 10 of Florida’s public universities have struck agreements with ICE authorizing campus police to question and detain undocumented immigrants, Inside Higher Ed reports. Trump Retaliates Against Harvard After Harvard refused to capitulate to President Trump’s demands, the administration is now threatening to block the school from enrolling international students unless it hands over detailed records about the student body. Trump’s Newest Target: Nonprofit Orgs On the heels of threatening to yank Harvard’s tax-exempt status, President Trump threatened to target the tax-exempt status of other nonprofit organizations with whom his disagrees, singling out Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington for his ire. Ed Martin Is At It Again … In A New Realm Acting D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin, who incidentally has been less than forthcoming with the Senate Judiciary Committee as it considers his nomination to the permanent position, has sent one of his series of highly inappropriate, abusive, and threatening letters of inquiry to a peer-reviewed medical journal: For Your Radar … EAC: TPM’s Kate Riga reports from court in DC, where an increasingly frustrated federal judge called out the Election Assistance Commission for beginning to implement President Trump’s executive order on elections even though the administration denied it had done anything yet. CFPB: U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson of D.C. has scheduled a hearing this morning on whether mass layoffs at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau violate her preliminary injunction that essentially kept the Trump administration from shuttering the agency. SSA: U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander has issued a preliminary injunction blocking DOGE from accessing the sensitive personal information of millions of Americans stored by the Social Security Administration. Fun Read Brian Beutler: Don’t Let Soft Donald Trump Redefine Masculinity And The Meaning Of Work Quote Of The Day TPM’s Josh Marshall: We can talk endlessly about whether we’re still in a democracy or whether Trump wants to be or is acting like a dictator. We can debate words such as “fascism” that were unknown before a century ago. But what we are seeing right now is the definition of tyranny, a half-archaic concept the founders of the American Republic were very familiar with. Trump’s rule is both lawless and arbitrary. He has taken the bundle of powers the Constitution provides him to govern and defend the Constitution and turned them to an entirely different and corrupt purpose: using them as weapons to attack the people and institutions he deems his enemies. ‘We Are All Afraid’ In the course of describing her experience of the current Trump II moment, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) makes an extraordinary admission: The Bulwark @thebulwark.bsky.social Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R): "We are all afraid…I am oftentimes very anxious myself about using my voice because retaliation is real." Thu, 17 Apr 2025 14:01:58 GMT View on Bluesky Share Morning Memo Not yet a TPM member? The best way to support Morning Memo is by joining TPM. Read our mission. Become A Member Thanks for reading Morning Memo! Subscribe for free to receive new posts. Subscribed Help us make Morning Memo better. Reply to this email to give us your feedback.   Like Comment Restack   © 2025 TPM PO Box #490 217 W 18th St, New York, NY 10011, United States Unsubscribe

Origianl post continues:

Trump has chosen to defy the courts, setting up a full-blown constitutional crisis; an act, if successful, would destroy the courts' effectiveness in enforcing any rule. This Venezuelan deportee case is the case the Trump administration is choosing to try to challenge and destroy the independence of the judicial system and make him the ruler of the law.  The Trump regime thinks they are clever because Venezuelans do not have any sympathy in the American population, and the fact that the victim had been wrongfully deported is uncontested, so those questions are off the table. But now it is down to brass tacks: Who controls the rule of law: Trump or the independent judiciary?  Update: 4/16/2025 https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/judge-boasberg-trump-criminal-contempt-deportation-rcna200064

This was over the sneaky removal of deportees before they could face a due process hearing. The Judge has the power to prosecute and appoint an attorney to do so if the DOJ refuses.

Still there is another possible contempt of court case from another judge who has been asking for proof that the Trump regime has made any effort to 'facilitate" the return the wrongfully deported individual per the Supreme Court ruling.

Please don't whine that in writing this, it means I am opposed to deporting Venezuelan gang members if they are that. Don't give me that BS. What is at stake is our treasured rule of law and an independent judicial system that is supposed to be a coequal branch of government to Congress and the Executive branch, with checks and balances on each other. The principles at stake are huge and not understated. 

To act like he is not defying the Supreme Court, Trump is trying to claim SCOTUS did not mean what they said, you must get the victim back to the US. Failing that, the Trump administration contends it has no duty to return an illegally deported man to the US - POLITICO. 

The right-wing press goes off the rails when every judge's decision that goes against the Trump regime is called an anti-MAGA or anti-Trump decision. Cut it out. The decisions are about neither. Most of the district judges may be appointed by Democrats, but most of the decisions going in the Trump regime's favor were also appointed by Democrats.  It is decided upon whether the case violates the rule of law and/or the Constitution.. What sort of justice is that when all judges rule in favor of Trump's attempt to get away with unconstitutional executive orders, as he is trying to do/ Judges are sworn to support the rule of law and make it the standard for whether a case is decided one way or the other.  Trump's strategy seems to be go ahead and break the rule of law, violate the constitution and its provisions, and then see what he can get away with in the courts, in decisions, and in enforcement of those decisions. Violations and defiance become a test of wills.  In those instances, if  Trump wins, you can kiss the rule of law goodbye and say hello to a bona fide dictator, Trump.

 

 In the Venezuelan case, the issues are as follows: "Can the executive branch defy a court order and get away with it now and in the future? SCOTUS, all 9 clearly agreed the deportees all had to have a due process hearing before a judge before being shipped to jail, wherever in the world. That was no win for Trump, despite the spin they falsely claimed.  The consequence of a Trump regime win against the Supreme Court for their defiance in returning the victim. If Trump succeeds,  the judicial system would be powerless if the executive branch, the Trump regime, disagrees with a court's ruling.

 It also clears the way for the Trump regime to snatch anyone they consider undesirable citizens and undocumented migrants with no criminal records, and send them to an offshore gulag. He wouldn't dare do that to American citizens, you think? Guess again. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-he-supports-deporting-u-s-citizens/vi-AA1CU8zA?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=9d78653544234f2fb51ec936c412c15d&ei=5

 The Trump regime did have a way out. The President of El Salvador visited Trump today in the White House, and he could have "voluntarily" released the victim that is the focus of this defiant action. He did not.  He said no.  Now on to the courts of appeals and to the Supreme Court again in a full-out constitutional crisis, which Trump seems determined to cause in order to try to break the courts.

 What should those who support the rule of law fear the most: what will happen if the Trump regime defies a court order? By whom and how can there be any enforcement? MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: What those who support the rule of law should fear the most updated

From Trump Claims the Judges Ruling Against Him Are 'Radical' Liberals. Is That True? | Politics | U.S. News

"While judges appointed by Democratic presidents have been the most active in impeding Trump’s agenda, the majority of judges who left the president’s executive actions in place were also appointed by Democratic presidents. Of the 19 judges who kept the orders in place, 12 of them were appointed by Biden, Obama and Clinton. Seven of the judges were appointed by Republican presidents Trump and Bush."