Kilmar Abrego Garcia said he suffered severe beatings, severe sleep deprivation and psychological torture in the notorious El Salvador prison the Trump administration had deported him to in March, according to court documents filed Wednesday.

He said he was kicked and hit so often after arrival that by the following day, he had visible bruises and lumps all over his body. He said he and 20 others were forced to kneel all night long and guards hit anyone who fell.

  • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    We just need them to get it in front of SCOTUS.

    …you’re joking, right? It’s clear whose side they’re on and it isn’t the side of “I’m worried what history books will say about me.” There’s only three sane justices out of nine.

    • dan1101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      Who knows with the SC? They throw out a reasonable judgement every 3rd or 4th time. Sort of like insurance companies, gotta pay some claims to get good reviews.

      • kava@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        Yeah I don’t think it’s a given they will support the president in everything. In fact, I foresee a future showdown with the Supreme Court that has potential to cause a constitutional crisis.

        Court says one thing… executive ignores and does another… what happens? The legitimacy of the government is hanging by a thread. The next couple years will decide the next 20

        • ubergeek@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 days ago

          In fact, I foresee a future showdown with the Supreme Court that has potential to cause a constitutional crisis.

          What evidence do you have for this? Honestly asking here.

          I mean, the SCOTUS basically ruled the federal level electeds, appointeds, and hirees all have qualified immunity for “official acts”, and “official acts” are anything Trump says. The SCOTUS also ruled the courts cannot stop the POTUS from doing anything, except in extremely narrow ways. The SCOTUS also ruled that every regulation is a government overreach. The SCOTUS also ruled money is speech. The SCOTUS also ruled that Trump can, at will, deploy the military on US soil to wage war against it’s citizens.

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            19 days ago

            That’s not entirely correct. “Official acts” are to be determined by the judge presiding over the case. Since no charges against the President have been filed or heard, “official acts” have yet to be legally defined.

            • ubergeek@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              19 days ago

              So, official acts are going to be determined by judges appointed by Trump? How do you think that will work out?

              BTW, charges were laid against Trump, and he was convicted. And then, served no jail time, and the sentence was commuted.

              • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                19 days ago

                You’re talking about two different things. The charges that were heard, resulting in Trump’s conviction, were NYS charges. The federal charges have yet to be heard.

                Trump cannot pardon state charges, so a state judge can determine an official act if there are new state charges.

                • ubergeek@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  19 days ago

                  So, in the event of state charges, as long as he runs for an office, he is immune from everything then, correct?

                  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    19 days ago

                    Nah. He was convicted of the state charges. That’s my point. He did not use immunity in that case. Therefore, “official acts” have yet to be defined by a judge.

                    He could be charged by the state as POTUS, and the state judge would determine of the acts that defined the criminal activity were “official acts.”