128 Comments
User's avatar
Katharine Hill's avatar

I just saw an article about the prisoners arriving in El Salvador. Doesn’t that constitute a violation of the court order?

Expand full comment
Charles Bastille's avatar

Hopefully, the judge will gather a posse to arrest Rubio, who gloated on Twitter about the deportation.

I'll happily volunteer for the posse, and I'll even bring a bottle of water for Rubio because I'm a nice guy at heart.

Expand full comment
Noel's avatar

You're nicer than I am. I'd pour that bottle of water into the puddle next to the red doormat Canada rolled out for him.

Expand full comment
Sooz Hall's avatar

I was thinking of Ex-LAX, but pouring out is ok too.

Expand full comment
Scott Gilbert's avatar

Make sure it's just out of reach...

Expand full comment
Charles Bastille's avatar

Oh em gee, that is a great idea.

Expand full comment
Maria K.'s avatar

Yes, I saw that too! Basically, they got deported anyway! So, what happens now?

Expand full comment
Charles Bastille's avatar

From an NY Times newsletter I got (sorry, no link, and I no longer subscribe):

"Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele said in a post on the X social media network that 238 alleged members of the Venezuelan gang had arrived in his country and were transferred to the Terrorism Confinement Center - a mega-prison that can hold up to 40,000 inmates - for a one-year period that could be renewed.

"The timing of when the flights carrying the alleged gang members departed the U.S. and arrived in El Salvador remained unclear, but an X post by Bukele suggested it was underway before the U.S. judge's order.

"'Oopsie...too late,'" Bukele posted in response to the order."

We're right there on the edge of becoming a terrorist state like we accuse countries like Iran of being.

Expand full comment
Alec's avatar

"Oopsie, too late." From a goddamn President. About sending people to a TERRORISM CONFINEMENT CENTER.

So glad I'm an Aussie right now.

Expand full comment
Gypsy Chaos's avatar

AND the US Secretary of State (rubio) REPOSTED IT!

How far we’ve fallen that a nation’s leader posts “Oopsie…too late”.

Expand full comment
Bob Wagner's avatar

We are well past the edge and in free fall. The Rubicon has been crossed, we are now waiting to see which Caesar we get.

Expand full comment
Heather M's avatar

I don’t think we’re on the edge. We are there

Expand full comment
Cheryl Steiger's avatar

“The line it is drawn, the curse it is cast….”

Expand full comment
Katharine Hill's avatar

I linked to that article from NYT under my notes. Hope you can find it.

Expand full comment
Patrick Tally's avatar

"Edge of becoming a terrorist state"? Sorry, but I think we may have crossed that line for many decades ago. I'm patriotic, but read too much history about CIA-sponsored coups(including Iran, 'you're welcome, Shah!') & military carpet-bombing that may also skew many global viewers opinion.

Expand full comment
Katharine Hill's avatar

Legal minds are working on it. Jay quotes from one who has a very interesting opinion. Let’s hope the Rule of Law prevails!

Expand full comment
Wendymae's avatar

And they're laughing about it. I am so enraged about this right now!

Expand full comment
PTW's avatar

My perpetual state, about everything.

Expand full comment
Wendymae's avatar

Yeah, me too.

Expand full comment
Kevin's avatar

It depends on the exact wording of the court order; there could be one of a few loopholes. I haven't found the actual TRO online.

First, it could be sloppily worded and only ban deportation "to Venezuela" instead of "of Venezuelan citizens".

Second, the administration could argue that they haven't been brought to El Salvador "for deportation" but "for detention" since El Salvador offered accepting US prisoners (even US citizens) into that prison.

Third, if the planes were already outside US airspace, the admin could argue that the court no longer had jurisdiction. Especially if those planes were also foreign planes.

Update: in previous deportations, Trump had used planes owned by the Venezuelan airline Conviasa. So they may have used the last two loopholes.

Expand full comment
Steve Kierkegaard's avatar

The Guardian reports they arrived and were imprisoned in Elsalvador by the Bukele government. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/16/deportation-alleged-gang-members-el-salvador

So it appears The Felon Guy is defying Federal court orders. Time to hold DHS and State Department administrators in contempt. As I understand it, if necessary courts can hire private security forms to arrest officials who are in contempt.

'“Oopsie … Too late,” Bukele posted online, followed by a laughing emoji.

Soon after Bukele’s statement, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, thanked El Salvador’s leader.

“Thank you for your assistance and friendship, President Bukele,” he wrote on the social media site X, following up on an earlier post in which he said the US had sent “2 dangerous top MS-13 leaders plus 21 of its most wanted back to face justice in El Salvador”.'

Expand full comment
Shaun Dakin's avatar

Yes

Expand full comment
Mel's avatar

THANK YOU! I've been wondering about this for some time now. I'm now wondering if those who carry out Trump's illegal orders can be arrested instead, since Trump has 'immunity? Isn't it just as illegal to act on illegal orders?

Off topic (sorry): I saw your FB post about Trump's plan to hand Social Security over to a private entity and the steps he intends to take to accomplish it (long after it was posted as I don't check FB that often anymore). I wondered about the legality of that considering Social Security is funded primarily through what amounts to tax collections from paychecks. Can a non-governmental authority actually collect taxes? I know this is for another day, but I have to add -- Mucking around with Social Security is such a bad idea. That's 72.5 million voters they'll be pissing off. They think town halls are rowdy now -- just wait. Guess what happens when you have a bunch of elderly folks with nothing else to lose?

Expand full comment
Janet Eubanks's avatar

I believe Trump’s “immunity” only goes to criminal cases. Civil infringements are a different animal.

Expand full comment
Fabian Transchel's avatar

SCOTUS would be wise to restrict immunity in the way you imply. I'm not so sure they're either wise or willing* enough to deny Trump immunity on a contempt order - but THAT would be something to watch.

* It's ultimately a matter of self-preservation really, so I don't fully write them off.

Expand full comment
Betsy L's avatar

Dubya tried to privatise SS and it went down in flames. That wasn't that long ago, either, so maybe they'll be somebody who'll push back. Or not.

Expand full comment
Ada Fuller's avatar

Yea, but Shrub had Barbara Bush to call and correct him! Trump is on an island of his own making.

Expand full comment
shee-rah's avatar

And Trump has Schmusk.

Expand full comment
Yehawes (VA)'s avatar

You know that observation that so many Nazis fell back on the defense they were only obeying orders? Well, apparently Musk Xeeted that the Nazi leaders didn't carry out the atrocities; civil servants did, thus introducing a whole new "defense": I didn't do it I only gave the orders. I'm sure that wouldn't carry in a court of law where purchased murder is as bad (and worse with some categories) as straight up killing someone but it sure follows along the tradition of attempting to create stochastic violence and mob boss "are you listening Russia?" and "these people" need bad things to happen to them. BTW, I don't get Musk's Xeets but I read it on the Alt National Parks Service Facebook feed and if you don't, you might consider following them. They're staying pretty on top of things, as they were the first time around.

Expand full comment
Carol Taylor Boyd's avatar

I made an emergency phone call to a close friend. We're both elderly, she's 78. She's genuinely scared that she won't get Social Security payment THIS month. She isn't suffering from dementia. I haven't seen the text messages that she is getting. I'm worried, she's very well educated, she has two Master's Degrees. I thought she'd know better. We can't let fear immobile us! We have to continue or begin to protest. We're in this together.

Expand full comment
M K's avatar

Please help her block those fear mongering texts. I block those on all our phones (we are 60 and 62, mother is 87). Currently, even “our side” constantly asks for money. It will help her peace of mind for sure.

Expand full comment
Ada Fuller's avatar

Like your friend, I’m also concerned about Social Security AND Medicare. I have cataract surgery scheduled in May; I told my doctor, if Medicare is crashed, I’ll have to cancel.

Expand full comment
Carol Taylor Boyd's avatar

That's scary! I hope everything goes well for you.

Expand full comment
Kevin's avatar

The irony is that privatizing SS is pretty much what the communists in East Germany did to bring companies under government control.

It would make most US public companies "people-owned" because the government would be able to exercise majority voting rights. Most East German companies had the legal form of "Volkseigner Betrieb" (people-owned company).

It would also be a huge windfall for the wealthy. The SS trust fund dwarfs the market capitalization of the total US stock market (although not as much as it did during Bush's era), so the trust fund could only buy stocks at vastly inflated prices that would immediately come crashing down.

Expand full comment
El Generico II's avatar

Thank you as always for the analysis, Jay!

If we allowed people to bid to be the one to serve contempt of court orders to Trump officials, with money going to the government, we would never again hear about a budget deficit.

Expand full comment
Jay Kuo's avatar

I like it!

Expand full comment
Marlene Lerner-Bigley (CA)'s avatar

This is a brilliant idea. I nominate the Capitol Policemen, Harry Dunne, Michael Fanone, and Aquilino Gonell to perform that duty!

Expand full comment
Mary Guercio's avatar

Could other countries refuse to allow the US planes to land?

Expand full comment
Lael's avatar

El Salvador won't refuse. They're being paid to take these prisoners. The president of El Salvador said oopsies in response to the news about the federal judge ordering the planes to turn around.

Expand full comment
Maria K.'s avatar

Oooh, good question!

Expand full comment
Kevin's avatar

Trump already strong-armed Venezuela into accepting those flights (Columbia, too). And El Salvador has actively lobbied for sending more people, even US citizens, to that prison.

Expand full comment
shee-rah's avatar

Let’s send Trump and his entire cabinet there!

Expand full comment
Betsy L's avatar

Thank you for this, Jay. This question has bothered me from the beginning: who's actually going to stop the Muskrat or Dumpy? Certainly not the FBI, the military, or the DOJ. It's like belling the cat. But several DC judges, most of them female, are not putting up with this stuff, and I think they'll have the spine to appount someone to do what needs to be done.

Expand full comment
Wendymae's avatar

And they're starting back to the "activist judges" bullshit for any ruling that goes against them.

Expand full comment
Lance Khrome's avatar

Inaction, stalling, endless appeals...sure, over time and reluctantly, court orders probably will be honored, but not after the damages intended by tRump EOs have been exacted, and in many cases, will have been difficult to reverse.

Which in fact is the purpose of "flooding the zone": precipitating countless lawsuits, overloading courts and judges, meanwhile pressing on with illegal and unconstitutional actions. When an administration controls all levels of government, including law enforcement, these tactics are very difficult to spike, and we are seeing the consequences played out daily, with no end in sight.

Expand full comment
Jay Kuo's avatar

Ultimately the people need to stand up to him through mass demonstrations and civil disobedience

Expand full comment
Sue Munda's avatar

Check out Budapest & Belgrade!! This is what we MUST do, all summer long. We need huge groups, though. He’ll order troops to fire on smaller ones.

Expand full comment
Robyn Muncy's avatar

Mass demonstrations: April 5 —DC—Mall—massive rally at 1:00. Numerous sister rallies across the country. Indivisible is a sponsor.

Expand full comment
Pam McCullough's avatar

I have April 5th on my calendar for protest

Expand full comment
Vilja Kainu, LLM, Med. Kand.'s avatar

Finland fought a civil war in 1917 and perhaps 1-3% of the population died in the fighting and the aftermath. What makes you think the kneeler democrats can or will force the republicans to relinquish power once the current president dies of old age for a lesser price?

Expand full comment
Fabian Transchel's avatar

You're not wrong about Democrats. Incidentally, the aftermath of this crisis may ultimately see the downfall of *both* parties.

Expand full comment
Vilja Kainu, LLM, Med. Kand.'s avatar

I know he's a radical, but Yanis Varoufakis, former Greek finance minister, started a new leftist party in Europe, as he and other leftist thinkers see the digital feudalism that's being imposed on us as greater risk than the land-based feudalism that was. Maybe worth checking out? I'll take a detour and come back to US parties after.

Incidentally, the reason for our civil war in Finland. Tenant farmers had it better than Russian serfs, but not by much, and the land-owning class and the other property-owning classes just wouldn't go along with land reforms that were proposed, and so we had a conflict. As a result. we got property rights reform in Finland, even though the 'rebellion' failed in the armed uprising phase. Threat of a new explicitly communist revolution and expansionist Soviet Union next door kept the capitalists open to negotiations. That was a case of land feudalism, and needed 'grassroots action' to force the property-owning class to negotiate.

As to the future of the two major parties in the US, I don't see how the current D leadership is credible after all this kneeling: for 10 years they've said that Donold is a threat to democracy and now that he is disobeying court orders. Despite TWICE swearing an oath to see the Law executed!

Judge Luttig (a conservative, very conservative lawyer) wrote a very understandable and strong (to this lawyer's brain, anyway) legal interpretation of how Donold's actions are _exactly_ the 'insurrection against the Constitution' -- note, not the country, the Constitution -- that the 14th amendment means. And the actions taken this year are, legally speaking, less ambiguous than before. Before, you could at least say that an 'insurrection' could not be 'insurrection against the Constitution', that the word, when a legal term, would always apply to traitorous acts. But the actions this year are an unambiguous breach of the Constitution and it's commands.

The Democrat leadership went along with it. After talking, for a decade, about how Donald is a major threat. After prof Snyder has helpfully described how obeying in advance takes us to unfreedom sooner rather than later.

How could the present leadership have any credibility with the voters after this, I don't know.

Expand full comment
Bombay Troubadour's avatar

Yep, Oaths of office are meaningless.

It’s too late. The courts cannot move fast enough to put a stop to the autocratic takeover. The architects of this 2025 takeover were well aware of how slow the courts work, and they built this into the scheme. Nobody has a way that can stop them, because there is no enforcement mechanism. Hamilton knew that the weakest link was the Justice branch of government, and history is proving him correct. It took 220 years, but the chickens are coming home to roost, because there is an elected autocrat sitting in the catbird’s seat, and he cares nothing about 250 years of legal precedence.

Expand full comment
Sierra's avatar

I disagree very strongly with the idea that nobody has a way that can stop them. Just because Project 2025 has a plan for this does not mean that it’s a good plan or that there are no holes in their logic. The funny thing about people bent on autocratic takeovers is that they tend to underestimate the free will and courage of those who might oppose them. Trump is already losing in the courts with rulings that have gone into effect without him being able to stop them. The legal briefings filed in a lot of his cases are VERY silly and often incomplete/incorrect to the point that judges are scolding them in court. These people may want us to think that they are these strategic masters with a foolproof plan, but we are already seeing that just isn’t true. They underestimate us at their own peril.

Expand full comment
Denise Donaldson's avatar

No question that multiple courts have ruled against the orange blob, Sierra. However, have the frozen funds in question actually been released? Have the fired government employees actually been reinstated? I haven't seen any follow-up reports, so I don’t know.

My point being that as long as the Donvict can continue to appeal, delay, and obstruct, he's got the upper hand. Until a judge openly says, "Do it now!" and mango man has no options for appeal, then he'll have to choose whether to obey or defy. At that point, we'll see the real power---or not---of the courts.

Expand full comment
Sierra's avatar

In some cases, yes! One example: the National Endowment for Democracy sued over denial of access to their congressionally appropriated funds. Earlier this week, they started getting access to those funds again. https://www.ned.org/ned-welcomes-state-departments-initial-steps-towards-restoring-funding/

Trump fired Gwynne Wilcox of the NLRB. A judge ruled against him. She's now back at work.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-reinstates-democratic-labor-board-member-fired-by-trump-2025-03-06/

The DOE resumed payments to efforts the Trump administration labeled “DEI,” including funding for stakeholder engagement and workforce development, AND reinstated fired workers.

https://www.latitudemedia.com/news/doe-will-resume-reimbursements-for-dei-activities/

https://www.eenews.net/articles/doe-reinstates-fired-employees/

The follow-up reports are there if you look for them, but with so many court cases, it can be difficult to track!

Expand full comment
Jocelyn B's avatar

AWESOME! Thank you. I certainly can't keep up, so I really appreciate your input. I have to believe that we will prevail, ultimately (as Robert Hubbell keeps saying.)

Expand full comment
Bob Wagner's avatar

The airplane ✈️ did not turn back. It’s unlikely the court can / will do a damn thing about it. I is abundantly clear who has the real power.

Expand full comment
Wendymae's avatar

I have read that some people have technically be reinstated, but their offices have already been dismantled or they have no ability to do their work because their purchasing power has been taken away etc.

Expand full comment
Sue Munda's avatar

I’ve been asking WHY not one senator has sued musk for even ONE of his criminal acts since this all started!! He’s a civilian!! What on earth is the problem?!? If I could afford a lawyer, I’d do it myself!!! 🤬🤬🤬

Expand full comment
Bombay Troubadour's avatar

I sincerely hope you are correct.

Expand full comment
Bob Wagner's avatar

There are optimist, pessimist and realist. Sierra, I would believe you are an optimist. I am a realist. Good luck to us both.

Expand full comment
Sierra's avatar

And what makes you the arbiter of who's a realist? So many people claim to be realists but are actually just defeatists.

No regime in history was toppled by people who who said "it's over, he has absolute power, there's nothing else that can be done" after 2 months. We owe it to ourselves and to each other to get a grip.

Expand full comment
Steve Kierkegaard's avatar

The subversion of the rule of law could lead to revolutions, if grievances of the People are ignored by those in power. If the economy is wrecks and people lose livelihoods and homes, will they still kowtow to the oligarchs? This is a dangerous path that could leave no one safe.

Expand full comment
Douglas Brown's avatar

This is a ray of hope in the gathering gloom.

I would be willing to bet that Capitol police officers injured on January 6 would be MORE than happy to serve a contempt writ, and even to arrest whomever is named in the writ.

Expand full comment
DW's avatar

So sad that this is even a subject for discussion.

Expand full comment
Heather's avatar

If the administration failed to follow a court order, wouldn't it be an impeachable offense?

Expand full comment
Yehawes (VA)'s avatar

Something could be an impeachable offense but until there is a Democrat House majority there can't be an impeachment, can there? I mean, I Know there won't be an actual vote for impeachment, but the call for impeachment can't even be heard with Mike Johnson scheduling what can and can't be heard, right?

Expand full comment
Ada Fuller's avatar

I think that be the 2026 elections, there may be enough unhappiness with the GOP, as led by Trump, that Democrats may increase their number of Senators. But the Dems need to get on the ball and work to find and promote candidates with potential now!

Expand full comment
Yehawes (VA)'s avatar

House special elections FL districts one and six: Gay Valimont and Josh Weil !! Look them up because despite my pleading they haven't put out an easily forwarded link with a short of them talking about themselves (I suspect they are thinking locally while their candidacies are nationally important, but they both present very well live), or try this link for phone bank opportunities to tell FL voters why the rest of the nation has hopes hung on their vote: https://www.mobilize.us/2024yesshecancampaign/event/758088/ . Tell everyone you know in FL because who knows who might know someone in those districts?

Expand full comment
Riversong Pond's avatar

You’re right, Ada. And we need to be on this as well. Check out the Working Families Party. They are busy recruiting progressive candidates as we speak.

Expand full comment
Geoff Anderson's avatar

and a 2/3's majority in the senate. Not gonna happen.

Expand full comment
Pam McCullough's avatar

I truly believe that if there was anonymous voting for impeachment they might do it. I mean it will never happen but I truly believe there are enough GOP members who do not agree with the destruction of our government and would vote for it. They however will not do it in the open

Expand full comment
Geoff Anderson's avatar

I think that we are in a world where impeachment is dead letter law.

Expand full comment
Janet Eubanks's avatar

Of course, but impeachment is bound to fail with Republicans in the majority. Even if by some miracle it squeaked by the House, it takes a 2/3 Senate majority to convict. That ain’t gonna happen.

Expand full comment
Frank van Doorn's avatar

He has consistently lost in court, please tell me of one instance where he followed a court decision? He’s comfortable in waiting for the ever growing frustration and the moment when people throw up their hands and say there is nothing we can do. Well, better to get the heads off the medusa now than wait for us all to turn to ineffectual stone.

Expand full comment
Ada Fuller's avatar

I would like to see action against Trump’s “elves” — aka appointees. They are abetting these wrong headed civil activities. Let them be a start!

Expand full comment
Joe's avatar

The district courts may, but ultimately whether or not they are allowed to enforce with third parties would go up to the supreme court and I'm not at all convinced they'd rule in their favor. Hell they'll probably frame it in a "tradition" that the marshals have all held that role and therefore are the only ones authorized. I hope I'm wrong but in this new political climate (OMGZ PONIES I said climate!), all bets are off as to how far they go.

Expand full comment
Mark Mansour's avatar

Excellent point on pardons. Few people realize he can’t do it in civil cases.

Expand full comment
Ada Fuller's avatar

I agree; I’m not a lawyer and didn’t know that.

Expand full comment
Suzy Dee's avatar

Thank you for bringing these posts to your site to educate. I truly appreciate you taking the time to find these important topics.

Expand full comment
Hehami's avatar

I could see the administration lying to the court and saying the planes had already landed. Nothing will be done to enforce these orders. They know that. That’s why Vance made the comment about ‘let the courts try to enforce them.’ I look forward to these assholes being tried for war crimes.

Expand full comment
Stacey Jenkins's avatar

Great article thank you, like many others we have been wondering and watching to see what happens. My hope is the Rule of Law holds firm

Expand full comment
Jan Austin's avatar

I believe the defiance is already in play. None of the court rulings have been acted upon yet that I have seen. No one is returning to their jobs which they lost illegally. No funds that were impounded have been released as dictated by the court. Venezuelans are still being deported. Please tell me I'm misinformed!! Otherwise, the Felon and his entire administration are thumbing their noses at the courts to see if they'll blink. What next?????

Expand full comment