pgnewser

Source Link
Excerpt:

A federal judge has upheld a Trump Administration policy that allows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to carry out enforcement operations at churches and other places of worship, representing another major court victory for the administration as it seeks to accelerate its mass deportation operations.

U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, who was appointed by Trump during his first term in the White House, denied a request from more than two dozen Jewish and Christian organizations to block the policy. In a lawsuit brought forward by the groups, they argued that the policy infringes on religious freedom and was causing a drop in attendance at religious services, especially among illegal aliens who fear potential deportation.

“That evidence suggests that congregants are staying home to avoid encountering ICE in their own neighborhoods, not because churches or synagogues are locations of elevated risk,” Friedrich wrote in her ruling.

The Washington-based judge found that the plaintiffs lack standing after finding little evidence that the administration was singling out places of worship. She also rejected the claim that the policy could be blamed for drops in attendance, noting that only a handful of immigration enforcement operations have taken place in and around churches or other places of worship.

Source Link
Excerpt:

The Supreme Court has interceded six times in less than three months to rein in federal judges who improperly exceeded their Article III authority and infringed on the Article II authority of President Donald Trump. Yet the high court continues to issue mealy-mouthed opinions which serve only to exacerbate the ongoing battle between the Executive and Judicial branches of government. And now there is a constitutional crisis primed to explode this week in a federal court in Maryland over the removal of an El Salvadoran — courtesy of the justices’ latest baby-splitting foray on Thursday.

On Thursday last, in Noem v. Garcia, the Supreme Court issued a short two-page order on President Trump’s application asking the justices to vacate an injunction issued by Maryland federal judge Paula Xinis. That injunction, issued on April 4, 2025, ordered the Trump Administration “to facilitate and effectuate the return of Plaintiff Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to the United States by no later than 11:59 PM on Monday, April 7, 2025.” The lower court further held that the “preliminary relief is issued to restore the status quo and to preserve Abrego Garcia’s access to due process in accordance with the Constitution and governing immigration statutes.”

After the Fourth Circuit refused to stay Judge Xinis’ order, the Trump Administration filed an application with the Supreme Court seeking an immediate stay followed by vacatur of the injunction. In its application, the Trump Administration acknowledged that Garcia had been wrongly removed to El Salvador, agreeing that there was an order barring Garcia’s return to his native homeland. However, the Trump Administration stressed that the order also concluded Garcia, as an alien illegally present in the United States, was subject to removal under federal law — just not to El Salvador. The immigration judge also rejected Garcia’s petition for asylum and for withholding of removal under CAT, or the Convention Against Torture. The Board of Immigration Appeals upheld those decisions.

Further, while Garcia had been wrongly removed to El Salvador, the Trump Administration argued that Judge Xinis lacked the authority to order him to “facilitate and effectuate” Garcia’s return. First, it was not for a federal judge to tell the Executive branch how to engage in diplomatic relations. And second, the president lacks the ability to control a foreign sovereign, making it impossible for him to “effectuate” Garcia’s return to the United States. Finally, Judge Xinis’ order improperly directs the Trump Administration to admit Garcia even though he is a member of MS-13, which has been designated a terrorist organization.