#24A949
A judge had ordered the Trump admin to provide due process to 137 Venezuelans taken from TX to CECOT to Venezuela.

"Apparently not interested in participating in this process, the Government’s responses essentially told the Court to pound sand." And so:
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
February 12, 2026 at 8:18 PM
The Govt needs Abrego Garcia's case to go away because things are gonna get uglier.

By 4/10 it knew it must disclose steps taken to facilitate his return.

Isn't charging AG such a step, if that's what it takes? Did DOJ hide his indictment as a state secret until called on their privilege claims?
June 7, 2025 at 3:48 PM
If the US govt is powerless to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia here because sovereign El Salvador makes its own decisions about persons held there,

how can that same govt ENSURE that El Salvador's treatment of him and others won't amount to TORTURE?

These 2 court claims can't both be true.
May 17, 2025 at 7:06 PM
The Supreme Court doesn’t sound super thrilled with the government getting cute about what words like ‘tomorrow’ mean.

www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
May 16, 2025 at 10:24 PM
Got info for bar complaint. Pamela Jo Bondi, bar#886440 email pam@ballardpartners.com. case#24A949 Noem v. Abrego Garcia,decision entered 4/10/25. Unable to download so it will attach here.Pls download when you file online&att to complaint.
"Other" for Ct& write in SCOTUS-online file for DC bar
May 3, 2025 at 4:05 AM
“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.”

— SCOTUS, Per Curiam, Noem v. Abrego Garcia, No. 24A949 (April 10, 2025)
April 21, 2025 at 3:29 AM
🖋️ “Enforce the Court’s Order in Noem v. Abrego Garcia (Docket No. 24A949)” hit 10 signers!

💬 Text SIGN PXFCLB to 50409
Enforce the Court’s Order in Noem v. Abrego Garcia (Docket No. 24A949)
Text SIGN PXFCLB to 50409 — Thank you for your recent ruling reaffirming the due process rights of individuals facing deportation. In this turbulent moment for our country, I write to express grave concern over ongoing constitutional violations—and to urge the Court to continue protecting the rule of law through firm enforcement of its judgments. The Constitution is the paramount law of the land. All government actions—especially those involving detention, deportation, surveillance, and federal spending—must be evaluated with utmost care to ensure compliance with constitutional rights, including habeas corpus, due process, freedom from illegal search and seizure, and the separation of powers. These protections are not optional, and no branch of government should be allowed to disregard them without consequence. With that in mind, I urge the Court to enforce its unanimous order in Noem v. Abrego Garcia, Docket No. 24A949. The executive branch has refused to comply. Mr. Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a lawful resident of Maryland, remains imprisoned in El Salvador in defiance of this Court’s mandate and that of the lower court. If the Court does not act to enforce its own judgment, it sets a dangerous precedent: that future administrations may treat judicial rulings as mere suggestions. The implications reach far beyond this case. A system in which executive defiance is tolerated is not a system of checks and balances—it is a collapse of constitutional governance. I respectfully request that the Court assert its authority, uphold its mandate, and take all necessary steps to compel compliance—and protect constitutional rights for all.
resist.bot
April 19, 2025 at 2:53 PM
Unless I have just been dropped onto Earth 3, a Supreme Court opinion from April 10, 2025 is not "old content" 👍
www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
April 19, 2025 at 5:26 AM
“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.” - Noem v. Abrego Garcia Docket No. 24A949
April 18, 2025 at 4:02 PM
Like, this was from the order, not Sotomayor's statement.
April 17, 2025 at 3:07 AM
👏 THIS is how you set the record straight!

The Supreme Court ruled 9:0
- not “kind of”
- not “unclear”
It was ILLEGAL!

And yes: Miller, Bondi & Leavitt are pushing false claims.

Read it. Share it. Know the facts.

#SCOTUS #24A949 #TruthMatters #RuleOfLaw #MeidasTouch #Constitution #DueProcess
SCOTUS ruled 9:0 AGAINST the ADMINISTRATION
on the deportation of Abrego Garcia!

Miller, Bondi & Leavitt PUBLICLY SPREAD FALSE CLAIMS!

You don't still believe them, do you?

See here what the COURT REALLY DECIDED.

#SCOTUS #24A949 #RuleOfLaw #Constitution #TruthMatters #Immigration #MeidasTouch
April 16, 2025 at 7:32 AM
SCOTUS ruled 9:0 AGAINST the ADMINISTRATION
on the deportation of Abrego Garcia!

Miller, Bondi & Leavitt PUBLICLY SPREAD FALSE CLAIMS!

You don't still believe them, do you?

See here what the COURT REALLY DECIDED.

#SCOTUS #24A949 #RuleOfLaw #Constitution #TruthMatters #Immigration #MeidasTouch
April 16, 2025 at 7:26 AM
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 24A949

KRISTI NOEM, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, ET AL. v. KILMAR ARMANDO ABREGO GARCIA, ET AL. ON APPLICATION TO VACATE INJUNCTION ENTERED BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
April 16, 2025 at 4:07 AM
Is it the public information office or some other way? I just send one email to ask them to enforce their own rulings on case 24A949 and linked to case
April 15, 2025 at 7:29 PM
Just for grins I searched teh Google for the term: supreme court "the application is granted in part and denied in part"

Very first hit 24A949 Noem v. Abrego Garcia (04/10/2025). On the Supreme Court website.

Didn't bother with the other search.

IANAL
April 15, 2025 at 4:57 PM
The Supreme Court said that "facilitate" was right and proper, but that "effectuate" was vague. As a result, the district court removed the word "effectuate" from its original order and replaced it with "facilitate".
April 14, 2025 at 5:38 PM
The orange one, Pam Bondi, and Steven Miller all say that SCOTUS said 9-0 that Kilmar Abrego Garcia does not have to be brought back to the U.S. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 24A949 🚫MAGA
April 14, 2025 at 4:46 PM
24A949 Noem v. Abrego Garcia (04/10/2025)
April 14, 2025 at 12:20 PM
4/10/2025
9-0
The Administration must return Garcia to the United States.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 24A949
KRISTI NOEM, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY, ET AL. v. KILMAR
ARMANDO ABREGO GARCIA, ET AL.

The ruling:

s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25...
s3.documentcloud.org
April 14, 2025 at 6:15 AM
To be fair, Judge Xinis's revised order uses the "facilitate the return" language. But that shouldn't be an obstacle to holding the govt accountable, given the Supreme Court's order, and she could always clarify again for the record (though everyone understand what she means).
April 13, 2025 at 10:59 PM
And totally predictable from the moment the SCOTUS order was issued. The loophole(s) in No. 24A949 language was big enough for Trump's DOJ to drive a bus through.
April 12, 2025 at 10:21 PM