Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="newfie" data-source="post: 6101570" data-attributes="member: 58700">it looks like it pretty much what we thought. 1) we violated an order that said we could not deport to ES because of death threats. 2) we could have deported him elsewhere i dont know where you would send a citizen of el salvadore. 3) I&#039;m guessing the order to not send him to ES for danger reasons was a nice legal move knowing we cant really send him any where else. 4) our people said screw that he&#039;s getting deported and ES is the only place we legally send him5) supreme court decision basically is district court was right to ask the trump admin to facilitate a return, wrong to set a deadline that would have resulted in contempt of court if they were not able to negotiate a return.&nbsp; supreme court says you can&#039;t put an unreasonable deadline on a diplomatic activity . 6) Supreme court says other wording in the district courts decision needs to be clarified and may have exceeded their authority. basically a split the baby decision without judging the merits of the actual case</blockquote>

[QUOTE="newfie, post: 6101570, member: 58700"] it looks like it pretty much what we thought. 1) we violated an order that said we could not deport to ES because of death threats. 2) we could have deported him elsewhere i dont know where you would send a citizen of el salvadore. 3) I'm guessing the order to not send him to ES for danger reasons was a nice legal move knowing we cant really send him any where else. 4) our people said screw that he's getting deported and ES is the only place we legally send him 5) supreme court decision basically is district court was right to ask the trump admin to facilitate a return, wrong to set a deadline that would have resulted in contempt of court if they were not able to negotiate a return. supreme court says you can't put an unreasonable deadline on a diplomatic activity . 6) Supreme court says other wording in the district courts decision needs to be clarified and may have exceeded their authority. basically a split the baby decision without judging the merits of the actual case [/QUOTE]

Verification