One of the most hackneyed attacks on President Trump is that he violates “traditional democratic norms.” Of course, this is another Democratic Party double standards play: most assertive Presidents ignore some “traditional norms” while forging new ones, and the last Democrati in the White House crushed some surprising traditional norms I thought were secure, like the norm of enforcing immigration laws, and the norm of selecting Cabinet members on the basis of their abilities rather than their EEOC categories, the norm of holding press conferences, the norm of having the elected President actually be the President, and the norm of not dropping out of a re-election campaign once it has begun so the party can install a more promising replacement without the formality of primaries and a democratic nominating process.
A democratic norm that is definitely on death’s door in the Trump Administration is the traditional respect the President has extended to reporters and journalists. Yesterday, President Trump was openly hostile and insulting to CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins when she questioned him in the Oval Office on the deportation of El Salvadoran national Kilmar Abrego Garcia. He called her a “low-rated anchor” while insulting her employer, CNN. Passing a question off to Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, the President sniped, “Can you just also respond to that question because you know it’s asked by CNN and they always ask it with a slant because they’re totally slanted because they don’t know what’s happening. That’s why nobody’s watching them.” Ouchie! Later in the session, Trump responded to another question about Garcia from Collins by saying, “How long do we have to answer this question? Why don’t you just say, ‘Isn’t it wonderful that we’re keeping criminals out of our country’? Why can’t you just say that? Why do you go over and over …and that’s why nobody watches you anymore! You have no credibility.”
The ethics verdict here is that it is unpresidential, unprofessional, undignified and disrespectful for a President of the United States to openly deride a journalist at a public event for just trying to do her job.
That said, Trump’s not wrong. Yesterday, while passing through the CNN broadcast on the way to my sock drawer, I happened to hear a Trump critic opining on El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, who fits the definition of an authoritarian “strongman” to a “T.” Anchor Jim Sciuto asked him, “Do you think President Trump envies the kind of power he has?”
Wait—what the hell kind of question is that? It is nothing but an invitation to bash the President based on—what, mind-reading? “Do you think the President secretly wants to molest little boys?” “Do you think he’s plotting to kidnap Hillary Clinton?” Do you think he wears adult diapers?”
To his credit, Sciuto’s guest ignored the question and changed the subject. Nevertheless, he went on to say that the Supreme Court’s weird unanimous ruling that the Administration needed to “‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador” is “absolutely clear and unambiguous.” That’s one for the “It isn’t what it is” Hall of Fame.
The order was deliberately ambiguous and vague, because it upheld a district court order that was meaningless. What does “facilitate” mean, when the United States has no power or jurisdiction to achieve a particular result? The guy’s in a Salvadoran prison. The country’s leader says he’s staying there. Is SCOTUS telling the U.S. to invade? Get the Impossible Missions team to break Garcia out of jail? There is no legal definition of what “facilitate” means in this context. The Roberts court deliberately “split the baby,” wanting to support the district court’s ruling that Garica was deported wrongly, but not eroding its own credibility by ordering a result that might be impossible to achieve.
That’s what a competent, trustworthy news organization would have told its viewers, but CNN wants to make it look like the President is defying the Supreme Court because, well, because CNN is pretty much as Trump described it in his Oval Office remarks.
The point will be reached where Presidents will no longer observe the “norm” of publicly showing respect for the press because the press is no longer worthy of respect.
Ethics Alarms 
Kilmar Abrego Garcia will not be released for one (or more) of 3 reasons:
It isn’t the US’s concern how bad Salvadoran prisons are. If it was an American citizen, that would materially change the equation. But he isn’t. It’s Garcia’s country and Garcia’s problem. I’d guess there are, oh, what, 50 million people around the globe in similarly bad straits? The attention being paid to a single non-citizen who may or may not have a connection to a vicious criminal gang is just weird. Where is Garcia on the list of US’s priorities? 7,687,422nd by my count, and I am just estimating….
It seems to me like the political left is building up Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to be the left’s new political martyr poster child so they can burn cities across the USA like they did back in the juvenile anti-authority George Floyd riots that were falsely presented to the public as justifiable mostly peaceful anti-racist protests. The left needs a martyr and Garcia seems like the low hanging fruit.
Nah. The Left doesn’t really care about Abrego García. He is not special enough and didn’t die in police custody while being filmed. Nothing to get all hot and bothered about. Their new hero is that high school track guy accused of stabbing another high school track guy. I do wonder, though: who brings a knife to a track meet?
jvb
Illegal immigrants are still afforded due process and the govt admitted he was deported illegally.
Yeah, and he’s still in another nation’s jail, and he’s a citizen of that country. So there was an administrative error here, but there is no available remedy. Bad luck. Moving on…
Bad luck moving on? Someone was illegally deported and put into a prison with no due process, and that’s your response? Hopefully that doesn’t happen to you. OOPS! Shrug, fart. What sort of legal/ethical analysis is that.
1. Watch it. 2. Illegal immigrants deserve no special sympathy. 3. I explained why it won’t happen to me.
Garcia is not the worst hill the Trump Deranged want to die on, but it’s a pretty dumb one. A possible gang member who is here illegally is causing a lot of expense and distress. Again: He doesn’t belong here. I’m sorry he was born in a crummy country, but no more than I am sorry for the many millions elsewhere who were born into crummy countries.
deserve no special sympathy.
Do they deserve due process?
He doesn’t belong here.
Yes he does and irrelevant. Since he’s still afforded due process.
Another question for you…
If a U.S. citizen were removed and imprisoned in El Salvador, would they have additional recourse to judicial relief than Abrego Garcia? If so, what and why? If not, do you simply think that the government is too virtuous to ever try to do that to a citizen, and too competent to do it accidentally? Or does the possibility just not especially concern you?
How long will it take Babylon Bee for headline:
“Trump in negotiations with Tom Cruise and his team to get Garcia out of Salvadoran gulag”
“Trump to fund “Mission Impossible 9″- profits going to eliminate national debt.”
The original MI TV show had an early episode about the IM squad springing a political prisoner from a foreign prison. It disguised itself asa traveling circus. Mary Ann Mobley was a guest star. Two-parter.
I just watched that episode about a month ago.
I recently watched a Batman episode where Cat Woman, wrongfully convicted of some heinous crime she committed, put the moves on Batman, leaving Ol’ Bruce Wayne all hot and bothered. I was surprised that the episode was as randy as it was for the 1960s tv.
jvb
Is the court that ambiguous though? It’s not like the United States couldn’t get this guy back if we really wanted to.
My more idealistic side is concerned.
I mean, if the guy was deported wrongly in violation of immigration law (and if he isn’t a “bad dude”–though that seems to be up for debate right now) then there is a major concern. Any deportation orders or actions need to be consistent with the law. It would be a certain amount of lawlessness for any president to ignore immigration law and deport people it deems criminal without any sort of legal proceeding at all, even if such a policy does clean up the streets.
I know immigration law is convoluted, but if Trump is really trying to just deport as he wills, then there is a huge problem. You don’t have to be a crazy lefty to say that. Even if the result is good (like deporting really terrible people). The left could just use their own version of this like they did with COVID. There’s always a “greater good” argument lurking around for anyone who wants it.
My practical side thinks that if some terrible people get deported (who never should’ve been here), then our country is safer for it. The gang that took over the apartment complex in Colorado would be an example.
Meh I dont know. It seems pretty obvious Trump is defying the order by not at least attempting to get the guy back, especially since America is paying for his incarceration.
Miller also falsely claimed the Trump Admin won in favor of a ruling 9-0 which is the total opposite of reality.
Hardly. The “order” demands that he do nothing. What does “at least attempting” mean? Just try proving that in court. “I thought real hard about it, and I couldn’t think of anything I could do to get him back.” Case closed. SCOTUS can’t order what measures the President chooses to accomplish something.It can no more order Trump to pressure a foreign government than it can order him to make peace in Ukraine. Go head, you tell me what substantive actions the Court demands. It’s a win for Trump because of what the ruling doesn’t do and say.
The “order” demands that he do nothing.
This is false. The Supreme Court order requires the govt to facilitate his return. The admin can fail, but they have to at least try…
Which they did not do. Which is where the failure to comply with a court order comes from.
Going to ask you this:
Under our government’s view. what prevents it from snatching anyone off the street whom they don’t particularly care for for one reason or another and throwing me in the back of a van, sticking me on an airplane and transporting me to a prison in El Salvador?
It is, of course, “illegal,” just as the seizure and transport of Abrego Garcia was, as even the govt acknowledges.
It’s illegal because I’m entitled to “due process,” which includes notice of the charges against me, the opportunity to contest the charges, a warrant executed by a neutral magistrate, blah blah.
But when my family obtains a court order requiring the government to get me back, the government can throw up its hands and say “Sorry, she is outside of our jurisdiction now; that’s up to the Salvadorans”?
‘The “order” demands that he do nothing.’ This is false. The Supreme Court order requires the govt to facilitate his return. The admin can fail, but they have to at least try… Did you read anything I wrote? “Facilitate” is meaningless. Courts don’t order people to ‘try.'” That’s why I wrote that the order amounts to nothing. As I wrote, there is no standard for “trying.”
Which they did not do. Which is where the failure to comply with a court order comes from. Wrong. You are in a fantasy world. If I cann a staff meeting and ask “How do we do this?” and the conclusion is, “There is no way,” then I have “tried.” If SCOTUS said “try to fly by flapping your arms,” it would be in the same category.
Under our government’s view. what prevents it from snatching anyone off the street whom they don’t particularly care for for one reason or another and throwing me in the back of a van, sticking me on an airplane and transporting me to a prison in El Salvador? Trump Derangement hysteria. Citizens can’t be treated that way under about a zillion laws and the Constitution. Garcia could be deported if he was indeed a member of a violent criminal gang ruled to be a terrorist organization. You can’t leap from “what ifs” involving citizens to Garcia’s problems.
It is, of course, “illegal,” just as the seizure and transport of Abrego Garcia was, as even the govt acknowledges.
It’s illegal because I’m entitled to “due process,” which includes notice of the charges against me, the opportunity to contest the charges, a warrant executed by a neutral magistrate, blah blah. There was plenty of “process,” just not enough. He was an illegal immigrant. Bottom line for me, and it should be for everyone. He didn’t belong here.
But when my family obtains a court order requiring the government to get me back, the government can throw up its hands and say “Sorry, she is outside of our jurisdiction now; that’s up to the Salvadorans”? No, of course not. The government is obligated to protect its citizens. There are diplomatic tools for getting citizens back. An illegal immigrant, in contrast, is not worth any sacrifices.
Facilitate” is meaningless. Courts don’t order people to ‘try.’”
The Supreme Court just did so I don’t know what this means.
How did the Trump admin try to facilitate his return?
There was plenty of “process,” just not enough
I don’t know what “just not enough” means.
But what process was followed? When was it? Why did the govt admit he was removed illegally? Was SCOTUS wrong in saying he was removed illegally?
An illegal immigrant, in contrast, is not worth any sacrifices.
So the laws that are meant to protect illegal immigrants can be ignored? Nice!
The government is obligated to protect its citizens
And “peoples” who aren’t citizens. Can we kill illegal immigrants? No This is an absurd line of argument.
“So the laws that are meant to protect illegal immigrants can be ignored? Nice!”
What laws “are meant to protect illegal immigrants”? That’s almost a joke. There are no such laws, just the legal procedures for kicking someone out of the country. this is not a class that the US has an interests in benefitting or helping. The laws set up a process, and in this case (apparently) a step was missed or mishandled. It still doesn’t make Gracia a legal resident.
The “facilitate” argument is silly. If a death row inmate was executed because a stay of execution was delivered too late, a court’s order that the state should take whatever measures available to “rectify the mistaken execution” would be simply impotent rhetoric meaning nothing, because nothing could be done. Same here. There are, in practical terms, no ways to “facilitate.”
What laws “are meant to protect illegal immigrants”?
huh? Do you think there aren’t any laws to protect illegal immigrants? What the administration did was illegal. The govt admitted that. The courts acknowledged it.
What’s the confusion here?
The confusion is that you’re not paying attention. The man was illegally in our country for 11 years. he absolutely could be deported, legally. There was an order that he could not be deported to El Salvador, but he was. Oops. He still should have been deported, and no laws protect illegal immigrants from that. He got 11 years here he had no right to have.
The man was already in the legal process of deportation. The clerical error merely adjusted his destination.
If you can demonstrate a realistic path to an actual citizen being mistakenly put into the process of deportation, I’ll echo your concerns about due process wholeheartedly.
I will, probably frustratingly to Jack, partially agree that this particular error in the system should benefit the accused (not because of any wrongness in the objectives of the system, but because our system was designed to protect citizens from malicious acts by government and ‘mistakes’, for all intents and purposes shouldn’t be differentiated from intent when the government is involved).
According to Stephen Miller in his interview by Bill Hemmer (Fox News) there was due process for Garcia:
“In 2019, he was ordered deported. He [has] a final removal order from the United States. These are things that no one disputes. Where is he from? El Salvador. Where is he a resident and citizen of? El Salvador. Is he here illegally? Yes. Does he have a deportation order? Yes.”
Conclusion: Garcia is properly deported to his home country, El Salvador. There is no practical remedy to bring Garcia back to the USA.
“The point will be reached where Presidents will no longer observe the ‘norm’ of publicly showing respect for the press because the press is no longer worthy of respect.”
That metaphorical ship has cast off and left the shore far behind. Respect, like trust, must be earned. A President can’t create respectable press conduct by publicly acknowledging what does not exist. That’s just enabling the rot that has infested the press to date. What we allow is what will continue.
Correction: The point has been reached where Presidents will no longer observe the “norm” of publicly showing respect for the press because the press is no longer worthy of respect.
About President Trump’s attitude towards verifiable anti-Trump media outlets;
I may not always like Trump’s approach but the direct public confrontation with these morally bankrupt media outlets needs to be very public and very pointed. Maintaining the status quo with lying propaganda media outlets like the AP, CNN, and MSNBC cannot continue, they’re truly a menace to society and need to be publicly shamed for their brazen bias, verifiable lies, and openly twisted propaganda. When an obvious threat of brazen lying propaganda rears its ugly head from within the 4th Estate and literally attacks the foundational core of our representative democracy by intentionally undermining truth and facts with their lies and propaganda you must confront it head on.
Again, I may not always like the words that President Trump is using towards some of the media, but the core of his argument against these media outlets is not wrong and needs to be confronted. I’ve been watching as many of the White House press briefings as I have the time to view and overall, I think the White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has been doing a pretty darn good job directly confronting some of these brazenly biased media outlets while remaining very professional and she might be the most transparent and truthful Press Secretary that we’ve ever seen.
Speaking of norms the Dems demolished. This headline from Fox (and I am not making this up nor is it a headline from The Bee):
Biden’s Back: 46 set to address disability advocates in first public event since Oval exit | Fox News
Did they mean first public appearance since he left the Obama White House in 2016?
Disability advocates? Surely you jest.