WASHINGTON — Immigration advocates and constitutional law experts raised concerns on Monday regarding President Donald Trump’s latest plan to deport U.S. citizens convicted of unspecified crimes to El Salvador without due process rights. During a meeting with El Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele at the White House, Trump discussed the possibility of deporting “heinous, violent criminals” who are U.S. citizens to El Salvador, citing the need to address domestic criminal behavior. The administration’s proposal, which remains unclear on whether it applies only to naturalized citizens, sparked legal and constitutional debates. Critics pointed out that existing immigration laws do not allow for the deportation of U.S. citizens and emphasized the importance of upholding due process rights. Legal experts highlighted historical precedents and constitutional principles to argue against the legality and constitutionality of such deportations. The government’s move to deport individuals to El Salvador, particularly alleged gang members, has raised questions about the lack of judicial oversight and potential violations of constitutional rights. Experts underscored the necessity for judicial intervention to prevent extrajudicial actions and uphold fundamental citizenship rights.
In her message, she stated that the ongoing legal battle concerning Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an immigrant who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador by the Justice Department, could have implications for any plans to deport U.S. citizens. Abrego Garcia had not been charged or convicted of any crimes in either the United States or El Salvador and was swiftly sent to El Salvador before the courts could intervene to protect his due process rights. The government claims he is affiliated with the MS-13 gang. Despite a court ruling ordering his return, the Trump administration is now arguing that he is not under their jurisdiction and that the decision to return him lies solely with El Salvador. El Salvador’s President Bukele has stated that he will not comply with the order.
The Supreme Court also addressed the case, stating that while the government was required to assist in Abrego Garcia’s return, the courts could not interfere with the president’s authority over foreign policy. This could potentially set a precedent for the summary deportation of U.S. citizens without the opportunity to challenge it, even if they have not been convicted of any crimes. Although Trump has indicated a focus on targeting criminals, there is a concern that others could be treated similarly without due process.
The wrongful deportation of an individual to El Salvador without recourse for return highlights the urgency for the courts to prevent U.S. citizens from being unlawfully entangled in similar situations. In the U.S., prisoners have basic constitutional rights and often contest their convictions and prison conditions. It is uncertain if these rights apply to individuals detained in foreign prisons.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem recently mentioned that President Bukele had informed her that those sent to the prison in El Salvador would not be released. This information underscores the need for the courts to compel the return of Abrego Garcia and others who were illegally deported to imprisonment in El Salvador. Law professor Somin emphasized that Trump’s plan is another reason why the courts must demand the return of these individuals.
