this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2025
168 points (100.0% liked)

politics

23544 readers
17 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A showdown may be imminent at the Supreme Court now that the Justice Department has hedged again.

A federal judge denied the Justice Department’s request for more time on Friday to explain its plans for returning a man to the U.S. after the government deported him to a notorious prison in El Salvador.

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis issued a two-page order Friday after Justice Department prosecutors cited a need for a “reasonable period of time to review the Supreme Court’s order,” issued late Thursday that ordered the government to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the U.S..

all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 81 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I hope that judge is pissed off enough to start jailing Administration officials for contempt.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Thanks for the laugh, I needed that.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Imagine how different America would be if they actually held people accountable for their actions and crimes.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago

I was SCREAMING for it after the Bush administration, but Obama and the rest of weak-willed Dem weenies let them off the hook.

If Obama had shown bold leadership when he needed to, MAGA never could have taken root. If Biden had shown bold leadership after Jan 6, HitlerPig and his henchmen woukd be in either Gitmo or the Supermax, and their followers would all be claiming they were never MAGA.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah, they weren't jailed for a coup, they're not getting jailed for contempt

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Not totally true. Navarro and Bannon each went to jail for 4 months for contept, for defying a subpoena from the Jan 6 committee. It also cost them a lot of money in legal fees.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If the judge thinks they are ignoring her orders, she absolutely can jail certain officials for civil contempt. Civil contempt has no set term, they simply stay in jail until the order is complied with. And since it is a civil charge, Der Gröpenfuhrer can't pardon it.

In this case, though, the order is just to provide regular updates on the progress of the case. So an official goes to jail, and then just gets released when those updates come.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Lol he owns them and they know it.

SCOTUS is just putting on a show

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Genuine question: who exactly would do that? Like I understand their are bailiffs who act as "police" in the courtroom but who would be the ones who physically arrested the Administration officials? The police or other members of the executive branch?

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

It's ridiculous that the US government is paying a foreign government to detain prisoners on its behalf and seems to be claiming it didn't put anything in the contract about a way to get the prisoners back.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I strongly suspect that this was all by design. If they jail them in US prisons, it's very easy for them to be released. When they're being held by a foreign government, it's very difficult to force them to release them, especially when they know the president doesn't actually want them released in the first place. I'd even wager there's an under the table agreement that they won't release them, even if pressed.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Well, it's not even under the table. The vile price of shit warden publicly said something to the effect of, "Yeah, none of them are ever seeing their homes again"

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago

Given that they admitted he was detained by mistake in the first place, I think "evil" is the word I'd use.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

It just temporary, until they finish the 30,000 bed facility theyre building in Guantanamo.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

SCrOTUS is spineless. They will kiss his slimy ass.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's what they were appointed to do.

When the pendulum swings back and we put the fascists to the wall we can't forget SCOTUS

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I really hope you're joking. We shouldn't advocate shooting fascists if they are in custody. That's a waste of bullets. Drown the fuckers in a pillow case instead.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Waste of a perfectly good pillow case. 🤨

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

They'll return him in a body bag.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Nah, he'll be the next one sent to that prison and never be seen again.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

They wouldnt waste money on a body bag.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

How do we know he’s even alive? They were so sure he’d never go home they may have simply killed the prisoner.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Possible. The other possibility is that they absolutely do not want a first hand account of what's going on inside to be available to the press.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

ABC just had a reporter in another part of the prison, and they pack 80 prisoners to a cell, with 2 toilets, and NOTHING else.

That's the part of the prison they didnt mind showing on international television.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Because if he were dead, they'd happily announce it, just to make the Libs scream, and scare the shit out of any undocumented people.

Right now he's just Schroedinger's Political Prisoner.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Uh oh! A VERY STERN LETTER is ABOUT to be MAYBE Written!