I long believed it was a matter of when, President Trump would openly defy the Supreme Court during his second term.
I even thought this would probably happen early in his second term.
But even I didn’t believe it would involve a guy wrongfully deported from the country whom Trump wants to keep in his caudillo pal’s Central American dungeon just because he freaking feels like it. You still surprise me sometimes, Donald.
El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele, sitting next to President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, said on Monday he will not return Kilmar Abrego García, a migrant from Maryland who was wrongfully deported.
"I don't have the power to return him to the United States," Bukele said when a reporter asked.
"How could I smuggle a terrorist into the United States?" he added, repeating the Trump administration's claim that Abrego García is a "terrorist" gang member of MS-13 -- which it has not claimed in the court battle over his fate.
Bukele, the self-described "world's coolest dictator" who has become a key partner in Trump's controversial deportations, called it a "preposterous question," saying "of course, I'm not going to do it," as Trump nodded in agreement.
[…]
The Supreme Court last week ordered the Trump administration to "facilitate" the return of Abrego Garcia. Trump on Friday said, "If the Supreme Court said bring somebody back, I would tell them to do that. I respect the Supreme Court."
But Trump changed course a day later, instead suggesting the fate of those deported rested with Bukele.
And on Monday, Trump ignored a question on his statement that he would abide by the Supreme Court ruling, instead attacking the CNN reporter who asked about it.
His top officials repeated his claim that what happens next is solely up to El Salvador and that courts can't direct how the executive branch engages in foreign relations.
"It's up to El Salvador if they want to return him," Attorney General Pam Bondi said.
Jeff Blehar points out all the ways this sets an absolutely horrible precedent, but what would you expect from a writer for a bleeding heart liberal publication like (checks notes) National Review?
What matters most about this cynical shell game is the transparent contempt for the law on display. Bukele is not his own man, after all; the purpose of his appearance yesterday was to read lines I can only speculate were at least reviewed by Stephen Miller, who sat in on the press conference to pretend that the Supreme Court had ruled 9–0 in favor of Trump rather than against him. Bukele, Trump, and Miller all wore Cheshire cat grins as they calmly told the world that the matter was out of their hands, even though all know the opposite to be true.
And everybody understands why the Trump administration feels free to defy the law: It believes it has the people on its side. He’s an illegal, anyway! We’re here to deport illegals. Who cares exactly how they’re expelled from the country, that’s not America’s problem. Miller said as much in the Oval Office press conference with Bukele. His primary defense to reporters was, “If [Abrego Garcia] was your neighbor, you would move right away.” In other words: Trust us, he’s a bad guy, so who cares how we got rid of him?
We have seen this attitude on display already in various other facets of the Trump administration: in the casual disregard for protocol embodied by Elon Musk’s DOGE, yes, but also with other bungled deportations and most flagrantly with Trump’s openly lawless decision, ten days ago, to delay closing TikTok in direct contravention of the black letter of a bill voted for by Congress and signed into law by his predecessor. The Abrego Garcia case is only the freshest example of what is now a clearly demonstrated pattern of willingness — indeed, desire — on the part of the administration to flout the procedural, constitutional, and prudential limits of the law in every field.
[…]
Trump cares only about public opinion; Miller trusts that the people will not care, so the law can be defied to serve Trump’s populist goals. I am terrified that he is correct. Who can force Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States? Who can compel Trump to execute the TikTok ban? Who among his own party would condemn him? Who of the opposition party could hope to topple him?
And what law then restrains the president? Yesterday in the Oval Office, Miller and Trump were forced to insouciantly pretend that the Supreme Court hadn’t ruled against them. What comes next, should the court “clarify” its position? Don’t be surprised to see the Trump administration drop the pretense and deny the validity of the Supreme Court’s rulings altogether.
Donald Trump added a portrait of President Andrew Jackson in the Oval Office — an addition reputedly encouraged by none other than Stephen Miller. The reason suggests itself ominously enough in the current context. Jackson is famous for many things, but none more relevant now than his reaction to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Worcester v. Georgia (1832): “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”
A test of the rule of law is coming. It is not enough to write about this phenomenon with clinical detachment; it must be opposed. If not, I assure you that the spirits unleashed by Trump and Miller, perhaps seemingly innocuous now, will eventually consume us all. I’m not here to persuade you. I’m here to warn you.
I’ll keep checking the NR website to see if and how consistently its writers not named Jay Nordlinger keep Trump’s feet to the fire on this point.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Rigid Thinking to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.