This is Elise's most hard-hitting article yet, and I appreciate that: no mincing words! But I'm so so so angry that this is happening.
I know I'll likely be disappointed, but I want to go back to all those Trump voters Sharon surveyed last month and ask if they still support him. But I fear that the sunk cost and propaganda is too powerful. Meanwhile, other than a few gems like Van Hollen, our electeds only care about lining their own pockets (see yesterday's article on insider trading).
We can't wait for them: WE save us, together. Keep attending the Hands Off and Tesla Takedown protests. Care for your neighbors. Keep calling your reps. We can do this.
Yes! A lot of people don't know what's happening, so stickers, cards, flyers, and zines to leave in public areas are great (and less likely to get you into trouble than graffiti)! Fantastic choice!
I use post-it notes bc they’re easily removed out of respect for public spaces. I also leave postcard-size card campaign info that I print at home. They were recommended by Heather Cox Richardson.
Those Trump voters are unlikely to publicly admit they drunk the Kool-aid. But I like what Maria Shriver said, "Admit you were lied to." Because they were. He has always lied to get what he wants, and then done something else.
When I walked out of the theater earlier this year after watching "I'm Still Here," I was reflecting with my friends how the film reframed my understanding of modern authoritarianism. The Brazil depicted wasn't a constant display of military parades, but rather a society where repression operated behind a carefully maintained façade of normalcy. Families still enjoyed ice cream outings and beach parties while their neighbors quietly disappeared. The genius of this system wasn't that it eliminated freedom entirely, but that it made the sacrifice of others' freedom feel distant and abstract to those not directly affected.
What's particularly alarming about the Trump-Bukele partnership is how it normalizes extrajudicial punishment through economic incentives, creating a template for authoritarianism that feels distinctly American. By outsourcing incarceration to another country, the administration creates a jurisdictional limbo where legal protections become irrelevant, reminiscent of earlier experiments with Guantanamo Bay. The $15 million payment transforms human rights abuses into simple business transactions, while the theatrical public humiliation of detainees serves as powerful propaganda. Most concerning is how easily Americans might accept this arrangement – not because they embrace authoritarianism outright, but because it comes wrapped in familiar packaging: pragmatism, efficiency, and the promise of safety (a safety that seems threatened even despite the low numbers in the statistics provided by Elise).
El Salvador's citizens praise Bukele for allowing them to finally enjoy concerts and public spaces without gang violence, but this newfound "freedom" masks the wholesale abandonment of due process for everyone, not just the tens of thousands behind bars. Let’s not dismiss the horrible situation that pre-Bukele Salvadorans were faced with. It’s not like being afraid of stepping outside your front door is an example of freedom. But the popular solutions they received to solve the problem are ultimately just sweeping the issue under the rug in an unsustainable way.
Authoritarianism has already arrived in America, via outsourcing – it didn’t arrive with tanks in the streets or dramatic martial law declarations. Instead, it came draped in the American flag, to be celebrated at football games, to be justified from pulpits, and to be validated by academic institutions that have been extorted into compliance. The Venezuela-to-El Salvador deportation scheme offers a perfect case study: it bypasses legal hurdles, creates jurisdictional black holes beyond constitutional reach, and packages human rights abuses as pragmatic solutions to complex (exaggerated) problems. These gangs do exist and are dangerous, but I would have hoped that I wouldn’t be asked to suspend my essential legal rights for fear of something that isn’t likely to affect almost anyone’s ability to live their life.
Today it's Venezuelan gang suspects identified by questionable criteria like tattoos; tomorrow it could be domestic protesters or political opponents, or suspects based on who they follow on Substack, all processed through systems designed to operate beyond the reach of constitutional protections or public scrutiny.
What makes this approach so insidious is its plausible deniability. Citizens can still enjoy their daily lives and maintain the comforting fiction that they live in a free society, even as the foundations of that freedom are systematically dismantled for those deemed problematic. The Trump-Bukele model doesn't require widespread repression – just targeted action against marginalized groups that the majority can be convinced to fear or ignore, all while the machinery of entertainment and consumption continues uninterrupted. This is authoritarianism custom-built for American sensibilities: outsourced, profitable, entertaining, and wrapped in the language of practical problem-solving rather than ideological revolution.
The way this brand of authoritarianism is packaged is maddening. Calls for due process are met with "What? So you want violent criminals in America?" Plausible deniability is cowardice. We're not asking for violence. We're not asking for gangs. We're asking for justice based on laws because human beings are too limited, too vulnerable to corruption and power and money to be trusted on our own. Even the best of us make bad dictators. Lord help us when the worst of us become dictators.
I’m struck, too, by how we got here. El Salvadoran migrants came to the U.S. for the American dream, but instead got embroiled in gangs here. When they became too dangerous, we deported them to El Salvador, creating a dangerous state. An authoritarian comes in and promises safety at the cost of democracy by creating gulags. Then, we, too, get “safety” by shipping our prisoners to these gulags.
We export our violence in order to deport our crime, and make the whole world less democratic.
Brilliant put. It IS indeed frightening how so few Americans seem aware of this, how it could happen to any of them now, or care to do anything about it. Our local protest last week was the smallest yet - in a city that saw 30K+ turn out to see AOC & Bernie. Is this just another sad example of America's love of celebrity? Or that we always want a charismatic leader to do the heavy lifting? We are, it seems, a nation mostly made of followers, and I think a lot of people are still waiting for the latest iteration of this to show up and point the way.
But what is happening with this sick partnership with Bukele is chilling, and as a country we crossed a line last week with that White House meeting. I don't think many American realize that. Most Americans still can't conceive that it could happen here (hello, wake up, it IS ALREADY HAPPENING). We are already well down a very dark path, and without massive protests against this, IDK how we turn this ship around. It's deeply, deeply troubling.
I wish we could start a movement saying Trump isn't powerful enough to bring him back, so he'd get mad and prove us "wrong" 😑. These 2 presidents playing dumb is infuriating.
Great article, but please STOP using the words "deported" and "deportation" to describe that is happening here. Language has power and shapes our perceptions; as a writer you know this. These people have been "disappeared," kidnapped, and trafficked, defying the US Constitution which guarantees due process in a court of law for all PERSONS on US soil. Not all "citizens," all "persons." This explainer should appear in every article about Trump's new practice, against immigrants, due to the average American's poor knowledge of civics and American government. Trump has flouted US law and threatens to go to greater extremes to do so, threatening to focus next on American citizens.
(BTW, those taken are not all Venezuelan. Not Abrego Garcia, not that Brooklyn teen also taken by mistake. Any Latino name seems sufficient for ICE at this point.)
Never forget, too, that during the Biden administration the Dems put up no less than 3 bills to combat America's immigration problem; the GOP voted them all down, and then made the final one, led by GOP Rep. James Langford, a campaign issue - making sure to let that one fail after months of bipartisan work so Trump had "a problem to campaign on." These disappearances are a tactic to stoke fear and silence dissent.
And - I know it likely feels like using a tired old playbook to say so - it's no different than Hitler shipping people to Poland. Out of their country and whatever laws might offer any protection from human rights abuse of the worst kind. This is the same. And they are using your and my tax dollars to fund it. It's reprehensible.
Thanks for this point. It drives me batty that so much of media is covering this story as sort of a "deportation gone wrong" rather than what it actually is - imprisonment without charges, trials, or sentences. I get that this is a new circumstance and we don't necessarily have the sort of media language to write about it, but we should not be covering this as a simple deportation story.
YES. This is what I keep going back to. It would be heartbreaking for his family if he had been taken the way he was, loaded onto a plane and dropped off in a different country. But he would be free to call his wife, make plans, sleep in a bed, etc. That's not what happened, though. He was shipped to a prison - a prison completely lacking in humane treatment, I might add - and the media is calling it "deportation". It's infuriating.
While the founders didn't necessarily agree on every issue presented in delegation while comprising the Constitution, and subsequently the Bill of Rights--one principle stood out as a unifying theme (paraphrasing) -- The most egregious act of government would be to remove one's freedom without due process. The 5th Amendment was added for this specific reason. The founders fully appreciated the fact that to deny due process to anyone would immediately remove the moniker, "free country." The phrase, "innocent until proven guilty" is the one phrase that defines the U.S. as a free nation. That phrase is facilitated only by 'due process.' My point here: We no longer live in a free country.
Does anyone understand what the process was for approving this partnership and the 15 million? I was under the impression that congress would have to approve this type of expenditure but it seems to be framed as a Rubio/Trump decision. Any insight?
The original deportation was under the Alien Enemy Act. So Congress would have to approve an expenditure now that the Supreme Court said that Trump could not use that to deport immigrants. Unless he finds another way to go around Congress. The $15 million seems to be an unknown. No one other than the Trump admin appear to have seen the deal. From the news sources I have seen reporting on it.
The fact that no republicans in congress or in this administration have stood up to try and stop this unconstitutional behavior should be a flashing red light warning that the party in control has lost it’s morality and compassion, not to mention any attempt to even pretend to believe in democracy. We should all be very afraid.
This article reminds me of the articles Sharon shared last year about Project 2025. We were thinking then that the government would want to build a lot of detention centers to house the people currently being targeted. It seems this arrangement with El Salvador is what they are doing instead? It’s faster and out of sight. And sadly too many American citizens are cheering this on.
I’m curious if they would cheer if an American citizen whose only “crime”was going to a protest and happened to have say, unpaid medical bills or some traffic violations or even an accusation but not proven domestic violence charges in their past being sent to CECOT? If not, then they should be questioning why it’s okay for them now for folks like Garcia being sent there.
We have rules and laws and checks and balances here and we need to be following those before locking people up.
I am completely and utterly horrified. Since when does the United States act like there is no adherence to the Constitution or humanity? I have been doing some things to resist but I must obviously do more.
Out of all of the nominees for Trump’s cabinet, I felt best about Marco Rubio. He was actually qualified and, from previous speeches, seemed to care about US citizens.
Now I see him as the one of the most soul-less and untrustworthy Cabinet members: removing students’ visas/green cards without their knowledge, agreeing to send individuals to CECOT without due process, literally starving children to death with the destruction of USAID, and his new pro-Putin stance. He is truly a super-villain.
And the left is wasting a prime opportunity to unify around due process by instead backing taxpayer-funded trips that fly Democrats to El Salvador in an attempt to escort illegal immigrants back into the U.S.
I wish people cared enough about the right to due process that they would start paying attention, but it feels like they need something splashy and exciting or they'll just keep scrolling while due process slips out of our collective grasp.
I'm referring to the messaging here. The left is often asking, "What can we do?" and "How do we push back?" I don’t think flying to El Salvador to rally around someone credibly accused of domestic abuse—and possibly gang affiliation—is the right approach. We can absolutely be concerned about the lack of due process while also recognizing that this isn’t someone most people would want living in the U.S.
It's not hard to see why Abrego Garcia specifically has become the symbol for this fight: the administration admitted that he was deported due to an error and all nine Supreme Court justices agreed that he was "unlawfully" deported and denied his constitutional right to due process. 'Due process' is a broad, intangible concept but Abrego Garcia is a real, identifiable person. The way that "the right" keeps doubling down on his criminal history and alleged gang ties seems like a deflection, and a concerning one: are we supposed to wait until a truly guiltless person, a "perfect" victim, is unlawfully deported and imprisoned before we speak out? What precedents will have been established by the time that happens?
I've previously commented on another article that Garcia should be brought back to the U.S., given due process, and then deported. However, as The Preamble has reported, it's unlikely the U.S. would find another country willing to take him.
The broader point, in my opinion, is this: Democrats could be rallying around the principle of due process — because if it can happen to one person, it can happen to anyone. Instead, they choose to travel to El Salvador on the taxpayers' dime for media attention and photo-ops with some of the worst individuals. Messaging matters. Approaching it this way is losing public support.
"Instead, they choose to travel to El Salvador on the taxpayers' dime for media attention and photo-ops with some of the worst individuals."
Let's be very fair, here: this description equally applies to the multiple trips to El Salvador and the multiple CECOT photo-ops that the administration and Republican Reps have taken as well. I do agree with you that taxpayers should not be funding these delegations going to El Salvador to make a costly PR point.
But my question is more about this idea: "Democrats could be rallying around the principle of due process — because if it can happen to one person, it can happen to anyone."
Because that latter half of your sentence is exactly what I was trying to express, so I'm not sure what you're proposing instead. How do you rally around an idea without giving that idea a face and an identity? Courts don't hear cases based on the concept of a constitutional violation, they hear cases based on individuals affected by those violations. I personally find it troubling to suggest that we are fighting for the constitutional rights of the "wrong person" and I think that says something about how successfully the administration has shifted the narrative.
I agree with you. I just believe it would go a long way to stop treating Garcia as the gold standard of immigrants and instead acknowledge that, based on the allegations, he is deportable. And despite all that, we should still, and always, insist on due process. Even Elise, in her reporting here, won’t acknowledge any potential wrongdoing. She writes, “claims his lawyers vigorously deny,” as if they’d ever say anything different publicly.
AS I see it, they have been uniting around the "due process" issue, as opposed to just this man - Sen. Van Hollen has been saying so very clearly and emphatically in all his media interviews since retiring from El Salvador.
You have strange ideas of "due process." Due process is necessary to determine if deportation is lawful. It's not the pesky, performative step democratic authorities must take prior to executing the predetermined punishment.
It’s not about the person. It’s about the fact that everyone is entitled due process under the law. It’s not about the government telling people this man is in a gang. They need to present evidence in court.
But as a person he's still privy to due process. If we start judging people for their actions and whether they deserve due process we are going down a slippery slope. It would have been incredibly easy for the Trump admin to go about these deportations the right way. They are constantly trying to push the envelope and see what they can get away with. In this case the Supreme Court said no. So it's not just 'the left' saying that persons are privy to due process, it's the Supreme Court as well. And in this case I do think there are some people who are losing the ultimate goal. But for me all I want is to see people get their day in court. If that means he comes back and is ultimately deported somewhere else, ok. But the Trump admin should be doing this legally.
Thank you, Amber! The sheer obsession with some people to divide everyone into left and right in this comment section is something I will never understand.
You mean like the U.S. President, whose own wife accused him of forcible rape? Yeah, I totally agree, I don't want him living in the U.S. either and the sooner he gets sent to play golf in El Salvador the better off we'll all be.
I don’t know, I think that the senator going to El Salvador and showing us that Garcia is alive did a lot in making a message for all Americans that due process is a right. This is anecdotal but my son is Gen Z and he and his peers are way to the left of me. When they saw that Garcia was alive and that the senator didn’t back down until he met with him, my son thought the Senator a hero. He is a hero because he is reminding us that there is due process in America. I don’t think my son is alone in his thinking. I also know my son believes in following the law and isn’t interested in supporting criminals being allowed to walk freely amongst us. He was a a literal Boy Scout!
Abrego García is not credibly accused of domestic abuse, and has no gang affiliation whatsoever. He does have disabled children and a wife who need him back. He also has a legal right to be here in our country, determined by a US judge in a court of law. Allowing Abrego Garcia due process would have prevented him from being deported anywhere. But this administration has lied about him, because if they bring him back and the law prevails, then their entire plan is destroyed. Americans want Abrego Garcia back because if he isn’t returned, there’s no hope any of us are safe from being deported for any reason, citizen or not. There’s also credible evidence that 90% of those the administration have sent to El Salvador have no criminal record. The Democratic lawmakers traveling to El Salvador are doing exactly what the Trump Administration should legally be doing, per the unanimous SCOTUS ruling. And honestly, the Republicans in Congress are the real problem. Not standing up to Trump’s attempts at dictatorship are not just going to cost them an election but their jobs will be obsolete. Trump already thinks he’s above the other 2 branches of government and doesn’t seem to be interested in respecting our Constitution. Republicans aren’t even showing up to their districts to hold town halls. It’s really on them to do the right thing here. It’s becoming very clear that this current path is incredibly unpopular with voters.
I read the piece by Gabe, but my comment still stands. Accused and convicted are two different things, and when other legal analysts look at his case they are quick to point out the role that racism plays, which both you and Gabe haven’t taken into account. SCOTUS ruled for his return, as he was denied due process. He deserves to be returned and have his day in court, regardless of what he’s accused of, because if not, none of us are safe from this executive overreach. I have spent time with many undocumented immigrants. Many are my neighbors. The blatant racism and dehumanization of this group of people is staggering. Trump admin’s agenda has always been to dehumanize them. The point isn’t to deport and disappear immigrants, it’s to deport and disappear anyone who disagrees with them. Abrego Garcia is just the tip of the iceberg. Bring him back.
Sorry, Homer, but with all due respect no one has seen evidence to credibly link Abrego Garcia to any gang affiliation. Plus, that's a red herring. Clearly, per the 2019 ruling on Garcia's behalf, this IS someone a judge decided we would "want living in the US." He is a husband and a father and loved in his community.
Anyway, until he - and the others who were disappeared with him - get their day in court on American soil, we won't know what is true abotu any of them re: criminal records, gang affiliations, etc. Again, we are all rallying around the right to "due process" and Abrego Garcia, due to that 2019 protection order AGAINST being deported back to El Salvador, is a strong example of how unjust these disappearances of all these men have been.
It doesn’t matter whether he is a criminal or not. He’s afforded due process per the constitution. If he’s found to be a criminal per the court then deport him. If we let this slide then the right of all of us to present our case in court is at risk.
I mean if my family member was found in a prison in another country I’d want my representative to try to do something. We have precedent of lawmakers going to foreign countries to rescue people.
I don’t believe an tax payer money funded these trips, other than their salaries. Let’s not forget that plenty of republicans flew down there as well. Those were taxpayer funded as far as I can tell.
Van Hollen's trip was tax-payer funded, per his own admission, but the four other Congressional Democrats traveling to El Salvador have publicly stated that their trip is not being funded with taxpayer dollars.
There have been at least seven Congressional Republicans who have traveled down to El Salvador, not to mention Secretary Noem's taxpayer-funded trip to film promotion for the administration's prisoner detention at CECOT.
Plus, how much are taxpayers paying for Trump's weekly golfing excursions?
I could go on and on about the things I don't like that my taxes are funding. It just doesn't feel all that important anymore.
Even if their trip was taxpayer funded it would be a few thousand dollars at most. On a post talking about how we're now paying multiple millions to house prisoners in El Salvador.
In December I was in a cab with a driver who was from Venezuela. He was talking about how his country was beautiful and he had loved living there. But that since their dictator took charge he had to move to Spain and his house in Venezuela was no longer worth much. He missed the country it used to be.
In the article, you said “In other words, if you’re Venezuelan and inked, you’re suspect.” Are those the only actual parameters being used? That seems a bit hyperbolic.
It does seem hyperbolic, but at the same time I've seen multiple experts (on MS-13 and TDA specifically) who state that tattoos are not nearly as predictive as the administration is claiming (and at least one who said he's never seen tattoos interpreted the way the administration is doing) so the administration's opaque logic around the tattoos does seem to be incredibly risky for folks who otherwise fit the ethnic profile.
That may be true, but what I’m wondering about is the actual criteria that the administration is using to identify these people, and to determine that they are a dangerous enough threat that deportation is warranted. I don’t think it’s as simple as ethnicity and tattoos.
I don’t believe it’s photoshopped - the El Salvadoran government legitimately served those drinks. Per Sen Van Hollen, neither he nor Abrego Garcia touched them.
I definitely saw a number of people claiming that the cherries had been photoshopped. Not sure where that one originated, but it's been floating around since those photos were released.
This is Elise's most hard-hitting article yet, and I appreciate that: no mincing words! But I'm so so so angry that this is happening.
I know I'll likely be disappointed, but I want to go back to all those Trump voters Sharon surveyed last month and ask if they still support him. But I fear that the sunk cost and propaganda is too powerful. Meanwhile, other than a few gems like Van Hollen, our electeds only care about lining their own pockets (see yesterday's article on insider trading).
We can't wait for them: WE save us, together. Keep attending the Hands Off and Tesla Takedown protests. Care for your neighbors. Keep calling your reps. We can do this.
One more education/resistance action.
I write on post-it notes:
Bring back Kilmar Garcia!
Bring Back Due Process!
And leave them in public spaces. This weekend I made a new friend in a bar, and she asked, “are you the one that left the note?”
She loved it!
Yes! A lot of people don't know what's happening, so stickers, cards, flyers, and zines to leave in public areas are great (and less likely to get you into trouble than graffiti)! Fantastic choice!
I use post-it notes bc they’re easily removed out of respect for public spaces. I also leave postcard-size card campaign info that I print at home. They were recommended by Heather Cox Richardson.
https://cc4democracy.com/2025-cards/card-8-education-in-america
This is the most recent card campaign info. They have new ones every few weeks.
Those Trump voters are unlikely to publicly admit they drunk the Kool-aid. But I like what Maria Shriver said, "Admit you were lied to." Because they were. He has always lied to get what he wants, and then done something else.
When I walked out of the theater earlier this year after watching "I'm Still Here," I was reflecting with my friends how the film reframed my understanding of modern authoritarianism. The Brazil depicted wasn't a constant display of military parades, but rather a society where repression operated behind a carefully maintained façade of normalcy. Families still enjoyed ice cream outings and beach parties while their neighbors quietly disappeared. The genius of this system wasn't that it eliminated freedom entirely, but that it made the sacrifice of others' freedom feel distant and abstract to those not directly affected.
What's particularly alarming about the Trump-Bukele partnership is how it normalizes extrajudicial punishment through economic incentives, creating a template for authoritarianism that feels distinctly American. By outsourcing incarceration to another country, the administration creates a jurisdictional limbo where legal protections become irrelevant, reminiscent of earlier experiments with Guantanamo Bay. The $15 million payment transforms human rights abuses into simple business transactions, while the theatrical public humiliation of detainees serves as powerful propaganda. Most concerning is how easily Americans might accept this arrangement – not because they embrace authoritarianism outright, but because it comes wrapped in familiar packaging: pragmatism, efficiency, and the promise of safety (a safety that seems threatened even despite the low numbers in the statistics provided by Elise).
El Salvador's citizens praise Bukele for allowing them to finally enjoy concerts and public spaces without gang violence, but this newfound "freedom" masks the wholesale abandonment of due process for everyone, not just the tens of thousands behind bars. Let’s not dismiss the horrible situation that pre-Bukele Salvadorans were faced with. It’s not like being afraid of stepping outside your front door is an example of freedom. But the popular solutions they received to solve the problem are ultimately just sweeping the issue under the rug in an unsustainable way.
Authoritarianism has already arrived in America, via outsourcing – it didn’t arrive with tanks in the streets or dramatic martial law declarations. Instead, it came draped in the American flag, to be celebrated at football games, to be justified from pulpits, and to be validated by academic institutions that have been extorted into compliance. The Venezuela-to-El Salvador deportation scheme offers a perfect case study: it bypasses legal hurdles, creates jurisdictional black holes beyond constitutional reach, and packages human rights abuses as pragmatic solutions to complex (exaggerated) problems. These gangs do exist and are dangerous, but I would have hoped that I wouldn’t be asked to suspend my essential legal rights for fear of something that isn’t likely to affect almost anyone’s ability to live their life.
Today it's Venezuelan gang suspects identified by questionable criteria like tattoos; tomorrow it could be domestic protesters or political opponents, or suspects based on who they follow on Substack, all processed through systems designed to operate beyond the reach of constitutional protections or public scrutiny.
What makes this approach so insidious is its plausible deniability. Citizens can still enjoy their daily lives and maintain the comforting fiction that they live in a free society, even as the foundations of that freedom are systematically dismantled for those deemed problematic. The Trump-Bukele model doesn't require widespread repression – just targeted action against marginalized groups that the majority can be convinced to fear or ignore, all while the machinery of entertainment and consumption continues uninterrupted. This is authoritarianism custom-built for American sensibilities: outsourced, profitable, entertaining, and wrapped in the language of practical problem-solving rather than ideological revolution.
The way this brand of authoritarianism is packaged is maddening. Calls for due process are met with "What? So you want violent criminals in America?" Plausible deniability is cowardice. We're not asking for violence. We're not asking for gangs. We're asking for justice based on laws because human beings are too limited, too vulnerable to corruption and power and money to be trusted on our own. Even the best of us make bad dictators. Lord help us when the worst of us become dictators.
Well said !
I’m struck, too, by how we got here. El Salvadoran migrants came to the U.S. for the American dream, but instead got embroiled in gangs here. When they became too dangerous, we deported them to El Salvador, creating a dangerous state. An authoritarian comes in and promises safety at the cost of democracy by creating gulags. Then, we, too, get “safety” by shipping our prisoners to these gulags.
We export our violence in order to deport our crime, and make the whole world less democratic.
Brilliant put. It IS indeed frightening how so few Americans seem aware of this, how it could happen to any of them now, or care to do anything about it. Our local protest last week was the smallest yet - in a city that saw 30K+ turn out to see AOC & Bernie. Is this just another sad example of America's love of celebrity? Or that we always want a charismatic leader to do the heavy lifting? We are, it seems, a nation mostly made of followers, and I think a lot of people are still waiting for the latest iteration of this to show up and point the way.
But what is happening with this sick partnership with Bukele is chilling, and as a country we crossed a line last week with that White House meeting. I don't think many American realize that. Most Americans still can't conceive that it could happen here (hello, wake up, it IS ALREADY HAPPENING). We are already well down a very dark path, and without massive protests against this, IDK how we turn this ship around. It's deeply, deeply troubling.
Great writing and very dead on explanation of what we are doing by accepting this!
I wish we could start a movement saying Trump isn't powerful enough to bring him back, so he'd get mad and prove us "wrong" 😑. These 2 presidents playing dumb is infuriating.
Oh that is genius
Great article, but please STOP using the words "deported" and "deportation" to describe that is happening here. Language has power and shapes our perceptions; as a writer you know this. These people have been "disappeared," kidnapped, and trafficked, defying the US Constitution which guarantees due process in a court of law for all PERSONS on US soil. Not all "citizens," all "persons." This explainer should appear in every article about Trump's new practice, against immigrants, due to the average American's poor knowledge of civics and American government. Trump has flouted US law and threatens to go to greater extremes to do so, threatening to focus next on American citizens.
(BTW, those taken are not all Venezuelan. Not Abrego Garcia, not that Brooklyn teen also taken by mistake. Any Latino name seems sufficient for ICE at this point.)
Never forget, too, that during the Biden administration the Dems put up no less than 3 bills to combat America's immigration problem; the GOP voted them all down, and then made the final one, led by GOP Rep. James Langford, a campaign issue - making sure to let that one fail after months of bipartisan work so Trump had "a problem to campaign on." These disappearances are a tactic to stoke fear and silence dissent.
And - I know it likely feels like using a tired old playbook to say so - it's no different than Hitler shipping people to Poland. Out of their country and whatever laws might offer any protection from human rights abuse of the worst kind. This is the same. And they are using your and my tax dollars to fund it. It's reprehensible.
Thanks for this point. It drives me batty that so much of media is covering this story as sort of a "deportation gone wrong" rather than what it actually is - imprisonment without charges, trials, or sentences. I get that this is a new circumstance and we don't necessarily have the sort of media language to write about it, but we should not be covering this as a simple deportation story.
YES. This is what I keep going back to. It would be heartbreaking for his family if he had been taken the way he was, loaded onto a plane and dropped off in a different country. But he would be free to call his wife, make plans, sleep in a bed, etc. That's not what happened, though. He was shipped to a prison - a prison completely lacking in humane treatment, I might add - and the media is calling it "deportation". It's infuriating.
While the founders didn't necessarily agree on every issue presented in delegation while comprising the Constitution, and subsequently the Bill of Rights--one principle stood out as a unifying theme (paraphrasing) -- The most egregious act of government would be to remove one's freedom without due process. The 5th Amendment was added for this specific reason. The founders fully appreciated the fact that to deny due process to anyone would immediately remove the moniker, "free country." The phrase, "innocent until proven guilty" is the one phrase that defines the U.S. as a free nation. That phrase is facilitated only by 'due process.' My point here: We no longer live in a free country.
Does anyone understand what the process was for approving this partnership and the 15 million? I was under the impression that congress would have to approve this type of expenditure but it seems to be framed as a Rubio/Trump decision. Any insight?
The original deportation was under the Alien Enemy Act. So Congress would have to approve an expenditure now that the Supreme Court said that Trump could not use that to deport immigrants. Unless he finds another way to go around Congress. The $15 million seems to be an unknown. No one other than the Trump admin appear to have seen the deal. From the news sources I have seen reporting on it.
The fact that no republicans in congress or in this administration have stood up to try and stop this unconstitutional behavior should be a flashing red light warning that the party in control has lost it’s morality and compassion, not to mention any attempt to even pretend to believe in democracy. We should all be very afraid.
This article reminds me of the articles Sharon shared last year about Project 2025. We were thinking then that the government would want to build a lot of detention centers to house the people currently being targeted. It seems this arrangement with El Salvador is what they are doing instead? It’s faster and out of sight. And sadly too many American citizens are cheering this on.
I’m curious if they would cheer if an American citizen whose only “crime”was going to a protest and happened to have say, unpaid medical bills or some traffic violations or even an accusation but not proven domestic violence charges in their past being sent to CECOT? If not, then they should be questioning why it’s okay for them now for folks like Garcia being sent there.
We have rules and laws and checks and balances here and we need to be following those before locking people up.
I think at this point it’s too easy to even explain that away.
I am completely and utterly horrified. Since when does the United States act like there is no adherence to the Constitution or humanity? I have been doing some things to resist but I must obviously do more.
Out of all of the nominees for Trump’s cabinet, I felt best about Marco Rubio. He was actually qualified and, from previous speeches, seemed to care about US citizens.
Now I see him as the one of the most soul-less and untrustworthy Cabinet members: removing students’ visas/green cards without their knowledge, agreeing to send individuals to CECOT without due process, literally starving children to death with the destruction of USAID, and his new pro-Putin stance. He is truly a super-villain.
Ditto.
And the left is wasting a prime opportunity to unify around due process by instead backing taxpayer-funded trips that fly Democrats to El Salvador in an attempt to escort illegal immigrants back into the U.S.
You know it doesn’t have to be “the left” unifying behind due process. It could be all of us.
I wish people cared enough about the right to due process that they would start paying attention, but it feels like they need something splashy and exciting or they'll just keep scrolling while due process slips out of our collective grasp.
What would unifying around due process look like here to you?
I'm referring to the messaging here. The left is often asking, "What can we do?" and "How do we push back?" I don’t think flying to El Salvador to rally around someone credibly accused of domestic abuse—and possibly gang affiliation—is the right approach. We can absolutely be concerned about the lack of due process while also recognizing that this isn’t someone most people would want living in the U.S.
Do you have other suggestions?
It's not hard to see why Abrego Garcia specifically has become the symbol for this fight: the administration admitted that he was deported due to an error and all nine Supreme Court justices agreed that he was "unlawfully" deported and denied his constitutional right to due process. 'Due process' is a broad, intangible concept but Abrego Garcia is a real, identifiable person. The way that "the right" keeps doubling down on his criminal history and alleged gang ties seems like a deflection, and a concerning one: are we supposed to wait until a truly guiltless person, a "perfect" victim, is unlawfully deported and imprisoned before we speak out? What precedents will have been established by the time that happens?
I've previously commented on another article that Garcia should be brought back to the U.S., given due process, and then deported. However, as The Preamble has reported, it's unlikely the U.S. would find another country willing to take him.
The broader point, in my opinion, is this: Democrats could be rallying around the principle of due process — because if it can happen to one person, it can happen to anyone. Instead, they choose to travel to El Salvador on the taxpayers' dime for media attention and photo-ops with some of the worst individuals. Messaging matters. Approaching it this way is losing public support.
"Instead, they choose to travel to El Salvador on the taxpayers' dime for media attention and photo-ops with some of the worst individuals."
Let's be very fair, here: this description equally applies to the multiple trips to El Salvador and the multiple CECOT photo-ops that the administration and Republican Reps have taken as well. I do agree with you that taxpayers should not be funding these delegations going to El Salvador to make a costly PR point.
But my question is more about this idea: "Democrats could be rallying around the principle of due process — because if it can happen to one person, it can happen to anyone."
Because that latter half of your sentence is exactly what I was trying to express, so I'm not sure what you're proposing instead. How do you rally around an idea without giving that idea a face and an identity? Courts don't hear cases based on the concept of a constitutional violation, they hear cases based on individuals affected by those violations. I personally find it troubling to suggest that we are fighting for the constitutional rights of the "wrong person" and I think that says something about how successfully the administration has shifted the narrative.
I agree with you. I just believe it would go a long way to stop treating Garcia as the gold standard of immigrants and instead acknowledge that, based on the allegations, he is deportable. And despite all that, we should still, and always, insist on due process. Even Elise, in her reporting here, won’t acknowledge any potential wrongdoing. She writes, “claims his lawyers vigorously deny,” as if they’d ever say anything different publicly.
AS I see it, they have been uniting around the "due process" issue, as opposed to just this man - Sen. Van Hollen has been saying so very clearly and emphatically in all his media interviews since retiring from El Salvador.
You have strange ideas of "due process." Due process is necessary to determine if deportation is lawful. It's not the pesky, performative step democratic authorities must take prior to executing the predetermined punishment.
Deportation was determined lawful for Garcia in 2019.
It’s not about the person. It’s about the fact that everyone is entitled due process under the law. It’s not about the government telling people this man is in a gang. They need to present evidence in court.
But as a person he's still privy to due process. If we start judging people for their actions and whether they deserve due process we are going down a slippery slope. It would have been incredibly easy for the Trump admin to go about these deportations the right way. They are constantly trying to push the envelope and see what they can get away with. In this case the Supreme Court said no. So it's not just 'the left' saying that persons are privy to due process, it's the Supreme Court as well. And in this case I do think there are some people who are losing the ultimate goal. But for me all I want is to see people get their day in court. If that means he comes back and is ultimately deported somewhere else, ok. But the Trump admin should be doing this legally.
Thank you, Amber! The sheer obsession with some people to divide everyone into left and right in this comment section is something I will never understand.
You mean like the U.S. President, whose own wife accused him of forcible rape? Yeah, I totally agree, I don't want him living in the U.S. either and the sooner he gets sent to play golf in El Salvador the better off we'll all be.
I don’t know, I think that the senator going to El Salvador and showing us that Garcia is alive did a lot in making a message for all Americans that due process is a right. This is anecdotal but my son is Gen Z and he and his peers are way to the left of me. When they saw that Garcia was alive and that the senator didn’t back down until he met with him, my son thought the Senator a hero. He is a hero because he is reminding us that there is due process in America. I don’t think my son is alone in his thinking. I also know my son believes in following the law and isn’t interested in supporting criminals being allowed to walk freely amongst us. He was a a literal Boy Scout!
Abrego García is not credibly accused of domestic abuse, and has no gang affiliation whatsoever. He does have disabled children and a wife who need him back. He also has a legal right to be here in our country, determined by a US judge in a court of law. Allowing Abrego Garcia due process would have prevented him from being deported anywhere. But this administration has lied about him, because if they bring him back and the law prevails, then their entire plan is destroyed. Americans want Abrego Garcia back because if he isn’t returned, there’s no hope any of us are safe from being deported for any reason, citizen or not. There’s also credible evidence that 90% of those the administration have sent to El Salvador have no criminal record. The Democratic lawmakers traveling to El Salvador are doing exactly what the Trump Administration should legally be doing, per the unanimous SCOTUS ruling. And honestly, the Republicans in Congress are the real problem. Not standing up to Trump’s attempts at dictatorship are not just going to cost them an election but their jobs will be obsolete. Trump already thinks he’s above the other 2 branches of government and doesn’t seem to be interested in respecting our Constitution. Republicans aren’t even showing up to their districts to hold town halls. It’s really on them to do the right thing here. It’s becoming very clear that this current path is incredibly unpopular with voters.
You're misinformed. I recommend reading Gabe Fleisher's article on Garcia — someone shared it in the comments here on a different article.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-161497306
I read the piece by Gabe, but my comment still stands. Accused and convicted are two different things, and when other legal analysts look at his case they are quick to point out the role that racism plays, which both you and Gabe haven’t taken into account. SCOTUS ruled for his return, as he was denied due process. He deserves to be returned and have his day in court, regardless of what he’s accused of, because if not, none of us are safe from this executive overreach. I have spent time with many undocumented immigrants. Many are my neighbors. The blatant racism and dehumanization of this group of people is staggering. Trump admin’s agenda has always been to dehumanize them. The point isn’t to deport and disappear immigrants, it’s to deport and disappear anyone who disagrees with them. Abrego Garcia is just the tip of the iceberg. Bring him back.
"Abrego García is not credibly accused of domestic abuse, and has no gang affiliation whatsoever." This very first comment is objectively false.
Could not have said this better; thank you Maria!
Sorry, Homer, but with all due respect no one has seen evidence to credibly link Abrego Garcia to any gang affiliation. Plus, that's a red herring. Clearly, per the 2019 ruling on Garcia's behalf, this IS someone a judge decided we would "want living in the US." He is a husband and a father and loved in his community.
Anyway, until he - and the others who were disappeared with him - get their day in court on American soil, we won't know what is true abotu any of them re: criminal records, gang affiliations, etc. Again, we are all rallying around the right to "due process" and Abrego Garcia, due to that 2019 protection order AGAINST being deported back to El Salvador, is a strong example of how unjust these disappearances of all these men have been.
It doesn’t matter whether he is a criminal or not. He’s afforded due process per the constitution. If he’s found to be a criminal per the court then deport him. If we let this slide then the right of all of us to present our case in court is at risk.
I mean if my family member was found in a prison in another country I’d want my representative to try to do something. We have precedent of lawmakers going to foreign countries to rescue people.
I don’t believe an tax payer money funded these trips, other than their salaries. Let’s not forget that plenty of republicans flew down there as well. Those were taxpayer funded as far as I can tell.
Van Hollen's trip was tax-payer funded, per his own admission, but the four other Congressional Democrats traveling to El Salvador have publicly stated that their trip is not being funded with taxpayer dollars.
There have been at least seven Congressional Republicans who have traveled down to El Salvador, not to mention Secretary Noem's taxpayer-funded trip to film promotion for the administration's prisoner detention at CECOT.
Plus, how much are taxpayers paying for Trump's weekly golfing excursions?
I could go on and on about the things I don't like that my taxes are funding. It just doesn't feel all that important anymore.
Even if their trip was taxpayer funded it would be a few thousand dollars at most. On a post talking about how we're now paying multiple millions to house prisoners in El Salvador.
In December I was in a cab with a driver who was from Venezuela. He was talking about how his country was beautiful and he had loved living there. But that since their dictator took charge he had to move to Spain and his house in Venezuela was no longer worth much. He missed the country it used to be.
Absolutely chilling.
In the article, you said “In other words, if you’re Venezuelan and inked, you’re suspect.” Are those the only actual parameters being used? That seems a bit hyperbolic.
It does seem hyperbolic, but at the same time I've seen multiple experts (on MS-13 and TDA specifically) who state that tattoos are not nearly as predictive as the administration is claiming (and at least one who said he's never seen tattoos interpreted the way the administration is doing) so the administration's opaque logic around the tattoos does seem to be incredibly risky for folks who otherwise fit the ethnic profile.
That may be true, but what I’m wondering about is the actual criteria that the administration is using to identify these people, and to determine that they are a dangerous enough threat that deportation is warranted. I don’t think it’s as simple as ethnicity and tattoos.
Great story. But that photo of Garcia, I think you used the photoshopped one with the cherries that they made it look like he was having a margarita.
I don’t believe it’s photoshopped - the El Salvadoran government legitimately served those drinks. Per Sen Van Hollen, neither he nor Abrego Garcia touched them.
Thank you for clarifying.
They sure LOOK photoshopped, though. No real drink in the world exists with a salted rim and a cherry. 😂
😂😂😂 exactly!
Maybe you were thinking of the photo Trump shared that photoshopped MS 13 on Abrego Garcia's knuckles?
I definitely saw a number of people claiming that the cherries had been photoshopped. Not sure where that one originated, but it's been floating around since those photos were released.