All your 9 supreme court justices including 3 Trump appointees agree with the democrats that due process is more important than the GOPs wish to deport every foreing looking guy asap. This is not a culture war and this is not about the question if the one guy was a gang member or not, it is about your executive following the law.

If it "really doesn't matter" why do the democrats fight so hard for it? They blocked a senate bill that would ban men in women's sports...

For some Americans these are single issue when they get to the poll. It shows how crazy a candidate is if they support this crap. It's the reason trump won.

I dont know why the democrats do this to themselves. Try to out virtue signal each other on controversial issues just to show the world how great of a person they are. Of course, it's never on issues that actually affect them personally. Look up how many of the people in congress who are against the border wall live in gated communities with private security etc...

Idk, why do republicans push so hard for it? It makes no sense to have men in competitive women sport and it makes little sense to ban amateur athletes from playing the sport they want to play. It also really, really does not matter. The one famous relevant case was a person born as a woman who lived as a woman but apparently had shriveled testicles in her body instead of an uterus

All 9 supreme court justices including 3 Trump appointees struck down the lower court's attempt to violate the constitutional separation of powers and affirmed that the president is correct and is not required to get a sovereign power to return an MS13 member to us.
The executive is following the law here, the lower court was not and butchered it, three times. Once when they issued a ruling granting an MS13 member pseudoasylum on the basis that he faced violence from rival Barrio 18, an utterly insane contortion of the law the offends basic common sense. Second, when they abdicated their responsibility to rescind this order in a timely manner not only when it was patently absurd in the first place, but even if its underlying argument was swiftly negated when El Salvador that same year cracked down on gang crime and is now safer than the USA, rendering its premise false, yet the order remained in effect. And third, when the court attempted to infringe on the executive's plenary power of diplomacy and order the president to engage with a foreign leader like a puppet of the judiciary. A constitutional crisis of the court's making, one important enough it required the supreme court to step in and slap down.

This is a lie and you know it, so why bother? For everybody confused, goom very likely understands what the supreme court actually ruled and just is not arguing in good faith. Read the opinion for yourself if you are interested in facts, that does help quite often.

Edit: to clarif, goom does understand the actual ruling and this is why his wording is willfully misleading, so he can defend himself by arguing it is not completely false. The scs opinion says they don't see how a court could order Trump to get him back by El Salvador because there is no way how to ( this is the technically true part of his statement) but also 9 out of 9 SC agreed that Garcia should get due process in the US. If you don't believe me just read the original source, goom is lying to you.

This post was edited by SkySwallower on Apr 30 2025 02:01pm

You serious? The reason the Republicans bring it up over and over is because it forces the democrats to either defend men in women's sports, or renounce it. That's a tough spot for a democratic junior congressman who wants to get re-elected. Go against what the party is telling you, or go against all common sense.

So the reoublicans make a huge issue out of a non issue to rile up their base? I mean .. yes, probably. Sad that it is apparently working, isn't it?

Both sides do it bro.

Obama called trump a nazi and the next day they are cracking jokes at carters funeral.

The supreme court very pointedly struck down the ruling trying to force the president to return Garcia. The lower court attempted to order the president to take a diplomatic action, in violation of the article II powers allotted exclusively to the executive. The high court struck it down.
They would not have bothered intervening if the lower court hadn't overreached and violated the constitution, because otherwise the point would be moot- we'd be right where we are now, the executive asked to facilitate an action that will not occur.

I know, my post was factual and complete about what the SC decided, you tend to leave the "the removal was illegal and Garcia should get due process part in the US" part out.