Tag: deportation
Bondi Responds Feebly To Anti-Semitic Attack On Shapiro Residence

Bondi Responds Feebly To Anti-Semitic Attack On Shapiro Residence

Attorney General Pam Bondi has been everywhere lately—screaming about deportations, threatening 20-year prison sentences for anyone who so much as exhales near a Tesla, and doing her part to kill college scholarship programs for students of color.

But what she hasn’t done is use her power to investigate actual threats, like the arson attack at the home of Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania.

After days of silence, Bondi finally addressed the attack on Wednesday, calling it “horrific” and saying she “firmly” believes the arsonist wanted to kill Shapiro. But she stopped short of calling it “domestic terrorism,” a label that Bondi and Republicans she’s aligned herself with have thrown at peaceful Tesla protesters without hesitation.

The message is clear: If President Donald Trump doesn’t see a political advantage, Bondi doesn’t see a crime.

On Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer publicly called on the Department of Justice to treat the attack with the seriousness it deserves, including investigating it as a possible hate crime.

Cody Balmer, who was arrested for allegedly starting the fire at Shapiro’s house, reportedly targeted the Jewish governor for his pro-Israel stance—an attack that occurred during Passover. Balmer is currently being held in jail without bail.

“In conjunction with the timing of the attack during Passover, Governor Shapiro’s visible embrace of his Jewish faith, and the context of rising antisemitism globally and across the country raise serious concerns about antisemitic motivation,” Schumer, who is the highest-ranking Jewish public official in U.S. history, wrote in a letter to Bondi.

“Our federal authorities must bring the full weight of our civil-rights laws to bear in examining this matter. No person or public official should be targeted because of their faith, and no community should wonder whether such acts will be met with silence,” he added.

The DOJ and the White House have not publicly commented on Schumer’s request, but Bondi isn’t the only one who’s been quiet.

Shapiro told NBC News that Trump has yet to call him or issue any meaningful condemnation. When asked about it earlier this week, Trump dismissed the suspect as “just a whack job,” while also noting, pointedly, that the man “was not a fan of Trump.”

Jewish Democratic Council of America CEO Halie Soifer criticized Trump’s silence, noting his previous attacks on Shapiro.

“Last year, Trump didn’t hesitate to call Josh Shapiro a ‘highly overrated Jewish governor.’ Now, nearly four days after Gov. Shapiro was targeted in an act of political violence—reportedly due to his position on Israel—Trump hasn’t clearly condemned it,” she said.

Meanwhile, some Republicans have fully victim-blamed Shapiro for the attack. Rep. Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania, a potential 2026 challenger to Shapiro, said during a radio interview that the governor’s rhetoric may have fueled the attacker’s rage.

“The left’s got to look in the mirror here. Our hearts go out to the Shapiro family on this, but you know, they gotta tone it down too. I mean, every action Josh Shapiro has taken so far against the president has either been a lawsuit or a falsehood,” Meuser said.

Though Vice President JD Vance—hardly known for his moral clarity—called the attack “really disgusting violence” on Sunday, that kind of vague half-condemnation isn’t nearly enough.

Shapiro’s home was destroyed. He and his family were targeted. Yet the response from the Trump administration—which has been so busy supposedly fighting antisemitism—has been mostly crickets.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg

Judge Threatens White House With Contempt Over Deportation Order

Citing a “willful disregard,” Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg has found probable cause that the Trump administration could be held in criminal contempt of court after officials defied his order to not remove Venezuelan migrants from the country based on a centuries-old wartime law.

Boasberg, first appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush, on Wednesday “said he would launch proceedings to determine whether to hold Trump administration officials in criminal contempt,” The Washington Post reported.

Pointing to the “broader showdown between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary,” the Post reported that Boasberg “[said] the Trump administration’s actions on March 15, as the removal flights proceeded despite his order to the contrary, ‘demonstrate a willful disregard … sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt.'”

The judge wrote: “The Court does not reach such conclusion lightly or hastily; indeed, it has given Defendants ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions. None of their responses has been satisfactory.”

But Boasberg also offered the administration some options: essentially, file “a declaration explaining the steps they have taken and will take to do so,” or, file “declaration(s) identifying the individual(s) who, with knowledge of the Court’s classwide Temporary Restraining Order, made the decision not to halt the transfer of class members out of U.S. custody on March 15 and 16, 2025.”

Attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick explains that Boasberg ordered “them either to fix their mistake, or identify who made those decisions (presumably for further sanctions).”

“The Constitution,” Boasberg also wrote, citing previous rulings, “does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders — especially by officials of a coordinate branch who have sworn an oath to uphold it. To permit such officials to freely ‘annul the judgments of the courts of the United States’ would not just ‘destroy the rights acquired under those judgments’; it would make ‘a solemn mockery’ of ‘the constitution itself.’

Watch CNN’s report below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Egged On By Trump, Bukele Won't Return Victim Of Wrongful Deportation

Egged On By Trump, Bukele Won't Return Victim Of Wrongful Deportation

President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador joined President Donald Trump for a Q&A session with reporters on Monday, during which he pigheadedly said that he would not return Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland man who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador’s CECOT prison.

“I suppose you’re not suggesting that I smuggle a terrorist threat to the United States. I'm not going to do it. It's like, I mean, the question is preposterous,” he said.

Bukele continued to claim, “I don’t have the power to return him to the United States,” before Trump eventually jumped in to call the press “sick people” for asking about Garcia's Supreme Court-ordered return.

Garcia, a Salvadoran citizen and legal U.S. resident who is married to a U.S. citizen, held valid documents of residency issued by the Department of Homeland Security

Despite admitting that Garcia was wrongfully deported, the Trump administration has offered up a series of disingenuous and unconstitutional claims to justify leaving Garcia in El Salvador’s notoriously violent prison.

But the Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s ruling that the Trump administration must facilitate Garcia’s return to the United States.

Unsurprisingly, the Trump administration is now wrongfully claiming that the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over this case—because that would be a democracy with checks and balances, not a dictatorship.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Deportation 'Error': When Judicial Pigs Fly -- In Formation!

Deportation 'Error': When Judicial Pigs Fly -- In Formation!

Our alleged Supreme Court last night upheld a district court’s order to return the Salvadoran migrant Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, whom the government had wrongfully deported to El Salvador, where he has been held in the notorious Terrorism Confinement Center prison for the last 26 days.

“The order properly requires the government 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.” The Supreme Court's order, issued in response to an appeal by Garcia that he had been wrongfully seized and deported along with some 200 alleged Venezuelan gang members, cautioned District Court Judge Paula Xinis that she should define more precisely what she had meant by the word “effectuate” in her order to return Garcia, whom she said the government had deported by a “grievous error.”

The Trump administration had alleged without evidence that Garcia is a member of the violent street gang MS-13. Garcia has been a resident of the United States with protected status for 10 years, during which time he has never been arrested. He is married to a U.S. citizen. Judge Xinis found that the “evidence” against Garcia “consisted of nothing more than his Chicago Bulls hat and hoodie and a vague, uncorroborated allegation from a confidential informant claiming he belonged to MS-13’s ‘Western’ clique in New York — a place he has never lived.” Garcia has been a resident of Maryland and claimed never to have been to New York.

For its part, the Trump DOJ admitted in court that Garcia had been deported in an “administrative error” and claimed that there was nothing that could be done to return him to the U.S. because he was being held by a foreign nation, to which the U.S. government had turned him over. Garcia had been given no due process to challenge his deportation under the Alien Enemies Act. In a separate order earlier in the week, Chief Justice John Roberts had temporarily allowed the government to continue using the 200-plus year old law but said that future deportees had to be given due process notice of the proceedings against them and were entitled to challenge their deportation in court. Garcia had been given none of the due process now ordered for future use of the Alien Enemies Act by the Trump administration.

The Supreme Court’s three liberal justices, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson, signed a “statement” as part of the court’s otherwise unsigned order. Justice Sotomayor wrote that the Trump DOJ had asserted that it could refuse to return Garcia to the U.S., against the order of a federal judge, “for no reason recognized by law,” and that the Trump administration position “implies that it could deport and incarcerate any person, including U. S. citizens, without legal consequence, so long as it does so before a court can intervene.” `We could get down in the weeds as to why the court’s order was issued without naming its author or giving even a hint of what the vote might have been, but the most likely reason is that Roberts, Alito, Thomas et. al. had no interest in putting their names on a legal ruling that is bound to draw fire from Donald Trump and his political and legal sycophants.

The Supreme Court’s order in the Garcia matter is a victory for the wrongfully deported Salvadoran migrant but does not address either the fate of the Venezuelans deported along with him or the use of the Alien Enemies act to justify their deportation. The Alien Enemies Act allows the government to deport persons in a “time of war” who are considered dangerous to the country’s national security. There has been no declaration of war against Venezuela or any other country. The deported Venezuelans, many of whom claim they are not gang members and were rounded up on the basis of their soccer team tattoos and nothing else, are not “enemies” under any definition of that word.

How much leeway the Supreme Court will end up giving the Trump administration to use the Alien Enemies Act is not yet known, but today’s order provides hope that at least some due process will be observed in the deportation of migrants from this country. Under today’s order, the Trump administration will be forced to return at least one wrongfully deported migrant, and the court ordered the government to “be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps” with respect to the return of Garcia. That smells suspiciously like judicial oversight of the Trump DOJ and Department of State, which until this moment have acted in their enforcement of the laws and in judicial proceedings as if they are being run by a criminal gang.

Lucian K. Truscott IV, a graduate of West Point, has had a 50-year career as a journalist, novelist, and screenwriter. He has covered Watergate, the Stonewall riots, and wars in Lebanon, Iraq, and Afghanistan. He is also the author of five bestselling novels. He writes every day at luciantruscott.substack.com and you can follow him on Bluesky @lktiv.bsky.social and on Facebook at Lucian K. Truscott IV. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Lucian Truscott Newsletter.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World