Behind two high-profile deportation cases, a legal crisis grows

Summary

Consider This from NPR: Behind Two High-Profile Deportation Cases, a Legal Crisis Grows

Release Date: April 18, 2025
Host: Mary Louise Kelly
Guest: Amanda Frost, Professor of Law at the University of Virginia

---

Introduction

In this episode of NPR's Consider This, host Mary Louise Kelly delves into the escalating legal tensions surrounding two high-profile deportation cases involving the Trump administration. These cases have raised significant concerns about the administration's adherence to court orders and the broader implications for the rule of law in the United States.

---

Overview of High-Profile Deportation Cases

1. The Kilmar Abrego Garcia Case

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a U.S. resident, was wrongfully deported to a mega prison in El Salvador despite legal protections that should have safeguarded his stay in the United States. The Trump administration, however, has refused to comply with court orders to facilitate his return. This case has become a focal point of contention, highlighting the administration's alleged disregard for judicial mandates.

2. The Alien Enemies Act Case

President Trump has invoked the 18th-century Alien Enemies Act to deport migrants without due process. This use of an outdated wartime law has sparked legal challenges, questioning its application in modern immigration contexts.

---

Administration's Response and Legal Challenges

Mary Louise Kelly reports that the Trump administration, represented by Senior officials like White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and Attorney General Pam Bondi, have staunchly defended their actions. In a statement from the Oval Office, Miller vehemently condemned Kilmar Abrego Garcia, labeling him as a member of the MS-13 gang and describing the gang's activities as “the most barbaric activities in the world” (01:17).

Despite these claims, Abrego Garcia's lawyers have firmly denied any affiliation with MS-13, emphasizing that he was mistakenly identified and that he has no history with the gang in New York, where he resided.

---

Insights from Amanda Frost

Amanda Frost provides expert analysis on the legal intricacies of these cases. She explains the severe implications of Judge James Boasberg's recent ruling, which found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt for violating court orders (05:06). Frost elaborates:

"Criminal contempt is the power that all courts have to hold the lawyers in front of it in contempt. That means to find them or even imprison them if they've lied to the court, if they've refused to follow its orders or violated its orders." (05:06)

Frost criticizes the Supreme Court's handling of the Alien Enemies Act case, describing the court's decision as both a "win" and a "rebuke" for the administration. While the Supreme Court acknowledged the right to due process, it simultaneously instructed the administration to litigate the matter in a different jurisdiction, thereby complicating enforcement (05:51).

Furthermore, Frost expresses frustration with the Supreme Court's "wishywashy" language, which she believes undermines firm enforcement of legal rulings:

"If the Supreme Court spoke clearly and firmly, then in cases where the law is crystal clear... we could see a response." (07:57)

---

Implications on Rule of Law and Migration Policy

The episode highlights a growing rift between the executive and judicial branches, raising alarms about potential constitutional crises. Senate Minority Leader Chris Van Hollen emphasizes the importance of upholding due process:

"What we're doing is simply trying to uphold the Constitution of the United States. And the goal here is to have a court of law, through due process determine the outcome." (02:15)

Amanda Frost distinguishes between a constitutional crisis and what she terms a "Supreme Court crisis," suggesting that the latter arises from the administration's manipulative legal tactics rather than an outright rejection of the Supreme Court's authority. She underscores that regardless of the legal terminology, the tangible impact on migrants like Abrego Garcia remains severe:

"For them, the result is the same." (09:39)

Frost warns of the broader implications, including the potential for the administration to unilaterally deport individuals without due process, thereby eroding foundational legal protections.

---

Conclusion

Mary Louise Kelly wraps up the episode by emphasizing the critical nature of these legal battles and their far-reaching consequences for immigration policy and the integrity of the U.S. judicial system. The refusal of the Trump administration to comply fully with court orders not only undermines individual rights but also poses a significant threat to the rule of law.

---

Notable Quotes

• Stephen Miller: “Who again, is a member of Ms. 13, which, as I'm sure you understand, rapes little girls, murders women, murders children, is engaged in the most barbaric activities in the world. And I can promise you, if he was your neighbor, you would move right away.” 00:33

• Chris Van Hollen: “What we're doing is simply trying to uphold the Constitution of the United States... I'm fighting to uphold the due process rights of every individual.” 02:15

• Amanda Frost: “Criminal contempt is the power that all courts have to hold the lawyers in front of it in contempt... if they've lied to the court, if they've refused to follow its orders or violated its orders.” 05:06

• Amanda Frost: “If the Supreme Court spoke clearly and firmly... we could see a response.” 07:57

• Amanda Frost: “For them, the result is the same.” 09:39

---

Production Credits

• Produced by: Katherine Fink
• Edited by: Patrick Jaranwadanan
• Executive Producer: Sami Yenigun

---

Consider This offers a deep dive into the legal challenges posed by the Trump administration's deportation policies, highlighting the tension between different branches of government and the profound impact on individuals caught in the crossfire.

Transcript

[Mary Louise Kelly]

A cartoon this week in the New Yorker magazine shows a reporter standing before the steps of the Supreme Court. Into her microphone, she intones, today the Supreme Court is expected to rule in the case of people versus Guy who will ignore the ruling. Like all political cartoons, it's designed to capture a moment. And the moment in which we find ourselves presents a mounting number of legal cases where the Trump administration appears to be avoiding or ignoring court orders.

[Stephen Miller]

The Supreme Court said, bring somebody back.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

I would do that. I respect the Supreme Court. Last Friday, aboard a noisy Air Force One, President Trump told reporters, I respect the Supreme Court. Well, the Supreme Court has ordered the Trump administration to, quote, facilitate the return of a man named Kilmar Abrego GARCIA to the U.S. he was, the government acknowledges, wrongfully deported to a mega prison in El Salvador last month, despite legal protection which was supposed to prevent this. But this week, the Trump administration made its position clear. It was not bringing Abrego Garcia back. And senior officials doubled down on the claim that he's a dangerous gang member. He was illegally in our country.

[Amanda Frost]

He had been illegally in our country.

[Stephen Miller]

Who again, is a member of Ms. 13, which, as I'm sure you understand, rapes little girls, murders women, murders children, is engaged in the most barbaric activities in the world. And I can promise you, if he was your neighbor, you would move right away.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and Attorney General Pam Bondi speaking from the Oval Office this week alongside President Trump and El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele. It's worth mentioning lawyers for Abrego Garcia deny any affiliation with the gang ms.13 and note their client is accused of being part of an MS.13 clique in New York, where he has never lived.

[Chris Van Hollen]

Well, this is the big lie being perpetrated by the president, his administration and some Republicans in Congress.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

Earlier this week, I spoke with Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. Kilmar Abrego Garcia had been living in Maryland, and Senator Van Hollen went to El Salvador to visit him.

[Chris Van Hollen]

What we're doing is simply trying to uphold the Constitution of the United States. And the goal here is to have a court of law, through due process determine the outcome. I'm fighting to uphold the due process rights of every individual.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

Consider this. The tension between the Trump administration and courts in this and other cases has left many wondering, is the Trump administration ignoring the highest court in the U.S. and if so, what would that mean? From NPR, I'm Mary Louise Kelly.

[NPR Announcer]

Wait, wait, don't tell me. FRESH air. Up first, NPR News now Planet Money, TED Radio Hour Throughline the NPR Politics Podcast Code Switch Embedded books we love Wildcard are just some of the podcasts you can enjoy. Sponsor free with NPR. Get all sorts of perks across more than 20 podcasts with the bundle option. Learn more at plus.NPR.org Since Donald Trump.

Took office in January, a lot has happened.

[Amanda Frost]

The White House Budget Office ordered a.

[NPR Announcer]

Pause on all federal grants and loans. The impact of the Trump administration's tariffs is already being felt in President Trump's.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

Efforts to radically remake the federal government.

[NPR Announcer]

The NPR Politics Podcast covers it all. Keep up with what's happening in Washington and beyond with the NPR Politics Podcast. Listen every day. Having news at your fingertips is great, but sometimes you need an escape. And that's where shortwave comes in. We're a joy filled science podcast driven by wonder and curiosity that will get you out of your head and in touch with the world around you. Listen now to Short Wave, the science podcast from npr.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

It's consider this from npr. This week, two federal judges handling immigration cases escalated their attempts to get the Trump administration to comply with court orders. One case involves President Trump's use of the Alien enemies Act, the 18th century wartime law to deport migrants without due process. The other is about the wrongful deportation, also without due process, of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. To help us make sense of this, we brought back Amanda Frost, law professor at the University of Virginia. Welcome back.

[Amanda Frost]

Thank you.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

First, the case involving the Alien Enemies Act. This week, Judge James Boasberg ruled that there is, and I quote, probable cause to find the Trump administration in criminal contempt for violating his orders last month. What would that mean exactly? To be held in criminal contempt?

[Amanda Frost]

Yeah. So criminal contempt is the power that all courts have to hold the lawyers in front of it in contempt. That means to find them or even imprison them if they've lied to the court, if they've refused to follow its orders or violated its orders. Judge Boasberg, in a 46 page opinion, laid out very clearly all of the ways in which the executive branch and the lawyers before him mischaracterized, obfuscated and raised frivolous, meritless arguments to avoid his court order, which would have prevented these men from being wrongfully and illegally deported.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

The Supreme Court has also ruled on this case and in a way that I have seen described as a win for the Trump administration and simultaneously a rebuke to the Trump administration. Explain.

[Amanda Frost]

Yes, the Supreme Court's decision was deeply frustrating for those who, like myself, feel these men were Deported in violation of the Constitution and federal law. The Supreme Court said, yes, they have a right to notice and due process, which was violated in this case. That is such an important statement because, of course, the Trump administration was claiming they had no such right. But at the same time, the Supreme Court said, but they litigated in the wrong forum. They have to start again. They have to bring it in a different jurisdiction. That is extremely frustrating for the rule of law and for the rights of these men and future people who may be wrongfully deported.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

The second case I mentioned this was also this week. Judge Paula Zinis announced a two week expedited discovery over the Trump administration's refusal to return Kilmar Alberrego Garcia to the U.S. the Trump administration appealed. A federal appeals court has now denied that appeal. It's a lot to keep up with legally. Where does it leave us?

[Amanda Frost]

Yeah. So I'll just start with the fact that Abrego Garcia was wrongfully deported. As the government concedes he had a court order allowing him to stay in the United States. The government's view is, despite the error, they have no obligation to return him. Of course, Judge Sinas ruled against that position, said, yes, you do. You must facilitate and effectuate the return. The Supreme Court then backed her up, but I would have to say weakly. They said, yes, government, you must try to return him. But they didn't use the strong and clear language she used. And the government is now taking advantage of the leeway the Supreme Court gave them to do. At this point, nothing. And Judge Zenitz has responded by pushing this forward with a two week investigation as to what the government is doing.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

So let me focus us on the Supreme Court. I'm listening to the language you are using in describing the Supreme Court's recent actions. You have called them deeply frustrating. You've said they moved weakly. It sounds as though they are issuing rulings that are so carefully worded that they tiptoe up to wishy washy.

[Amanda Frost]

Yeah, I think wishywashy is the right word. And if the Supreme Court spoke clearly and firmly, then in cases where the law is crystal clear, as with Abrego Garcia, who was wrongfully removed in the government's own admission, then I think we could see a response. President Trump said, if the Supreme Court orders him returned, I will do it. And then the Supreme Court issues a weak order that I think suggests it's now afraid of the constitutional crisis that would come if the Trump administration were to ignore its rulings.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

Amanda Frost, we have interviewed you twice in the last two months and both times we have asked whether with the executive branch appearing to ignore the judicial branch, are we in a constitutional crisis? Listening to you, it sou like you see this more as a Supreme Court crisis right now than a constitutional crisis.

[Amanda Frost]

I think that's right. When we spoke before I defined the constitutional crisis, or what one would be would be an open flouting of the orders of the highest court in the land would be, no, we do not have to follow the Supreme Court's rulings. This administration isn't saying that, and it actually doesn't need to say that in light of the frustratingly weak Supreme Court rulings. What it is doing is making a mockery of the judicial process by returning to the lower courts and obfuscating, mischaracterizing and making frivolous and meritless arguments before those courts in ways that suggest that it doesn't need to openly flout orders as long as it can get away with this kind of misbehavior.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

For the migrants who are now sitting in a prison in El Salvador without due process, does the distinction between a constitutional crisis and a Supreme Court crisis matter?

[Amanda Frost]

No. For them, the result is the same. And I think it's worth adding here that they're the tip of the iceberg. We have the migrants that the president said it could deport without due process, in violation now clearly of what all agree the law is. Then we have an individual wrongly deported, and then we have a president saying he can deport citizens that he plans to look into deporting homegrown Americans, as he puts it. So there's no endpoint to the president's claim to be able to have unilateral power to remove people from the United States of America without due process.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

Amanda Frost is a professor at the University of Virginia specializing in immigration and citizenship law. Amanda Frost, thank you.

[Amanda Frost]

Thank you.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

This episode was produced by Katherine Fink. It was edited by Patrick Jaranwadanan. Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun. It's consider this from npr. I'm Mary Louise Kelly at Planet Money.

[Stephen Miller]

We'll take you from a race to make rum in the Caribbean.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

Our rum from a quality standpoint, is.

[Amanda Frost]

The best in the world.

[Stephen Miller]

To the labs dreaming up the most advanced microchips.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

It's very rare for people to go.

[Stephen Miller]

Inside to the back rooms of New York's Diamond District.

[Mary Louise Kelly]

What are you looking for? The stupid guy here, the old smart.

[Stephen Miller]

Don't worry about Planet Money from npr. We go to the story and take you along with us. Wherever you get your podcasts.

[Amanda Frost]

Want to hear this podcast without sponsor breaks? Amazon prime members can listen to Consider this sponsor free through Amazon Music. Or you can also support NPR's vital journalism and get consider this [e-mail] that's plus.NPR.org.