Judicial Order Cites the Declaration, the Constitution, and the Bible

  The Trump administration is snatching people without due process. Killing them, too.

Judge Fred Biery:

Before the Court is the petition of asylum seeker Adrian Conejo Arias and his five-year-old son for protection of the Great Writ of habeas 1 corpus. They seek nothing more than some modicum of due process and the rule of law. The government has responded.

The case has its genesis in the ill-conceived and incompetently-implemented government pursuit of daily deportation quotas, apparently even if it requires traumatizing children. This Court and others regularly send undocumented people to prison and orders them deported but do so by proper legal procedures.

Apparent also is the government's ignorance of an American historical document called the Declaration of Independence.  Thirty-three-year-old Thomas Jefferson enumerated grievances against a would-be authoritarian king over our nascent nation.  Among others were:  

1."He has sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People."  

2."He has excited domestic Insurrection among us.” 

3."For quartering large Bodies of Armed Troops among us." 

4."He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our Legislatures."

"We the people" are hearing echoes of that history. And then there is that pesky inconvenience called the Fourth Amendment: 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and persons or things to be seized. U.S. CONST. amend. IV.

Civics lesson to the government:  Administrative warrants issued by the executive branch to itself do not pass probable cause muster.  That is called the fox guarding the henhouse.  The Constitution requires an independent judicial officer. 

Accordingly, the Court finds that the Constitution of these United States trumps this administration's detention of petitioner Adrian Conejo Arias and his minor son, L.C.R.  The Great Writ and release from detention are GRANTED pursuant to the attached Judgment. 

Observing human behavior confirms that for some among us, the perfidious lust for unbridled power and the imposition of cruelty in its quest know no bounds and are bereft of human decency.  And the rule of law be damned.

Ultimately, Petitioners may, because of the arcane United States immigration system, return to their home country, involuntarily or by self-deportation.  But that result should occur through a more orderly and humane policy than currently in place.  

 

Matthew 19:14 Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

John 11:35 Jesus wept.

Trump and Habeas Corpus

 The Trump administration is snatching people without due process.

Michael Luciano at Mediaite:

On Wednesday, a seemingly MAGA reporter asked Trump, “Have you given any more thought to possibly suspending habeas corpus to not only deal with these insurrectionists across the nation, but also to continue rapidly deporting illegal aliens?”

“Suspending who?” Trump responded.

“Habeas corpus,” came the reply.

“I don’t know,” the president said. “I’d rather leave that to Kristi. What do you think?”

“Sir, I haven’t been part of any discussions on that,” Noem said.

Trump then moved on to a CNN reporter, whom he promptly scolded.

Noem was perhaps not the best person to ask about habeas corpus. Testifying before the Senate back in May, Noem was asked by Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) what habeas corpus is.

The secretary responded, “Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country and suspend their right to–”

At that point, Hassan interrupted to correct Noem.

“Excuse me, habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people,” Hasan stated

Q: Have you given any more thought to possibly suspending habeas corpus?

TRUMP: Suspending who?

Q: Habeas corpus

TRUMP: I don't know. I'd rather leave that to Kristi. pic.twitter.com/DdjFnoUIrM

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 8, 2025

Kafka and CECOT

  The Trump administration is snatching people without due process.

J.G.G. v. TRUMP  Order Date Filed: 06/04/2025 Court: District Court (D.D.C.) Affiliate: Washington, D.C.

One morning, Kafka’s Josef K. awakens to encounter two strange men outside his room.  As he gets his bearings, he realizes that he is under arrest.  When he asks the strangers why, he receives no answer.  “We weren’t sent to tell you that,” one says.  “Proceedings are under way and you’ll learn everything in due course.”  Franz Kafka, The Trial 5 (Breon Mitchell trans., Schocken Books Inc. 1998).  Bewildered by these men and distressed by their message, K. tries to comfort himself that he lives in “a state governed by law,” one where “all statutes [are] in force.”  Id. at 6.  He therefore demands again, “How can I be under arrest?  And in this manner?”  “Now there you go again,” the guard replies.  “We don’t answer such questions.”  Undeterred, K. offers his “papers” and demands their arrest warrant.  “Good heavens!” the man scolds.  “There’s been no mistake.”  “[O]ur department,” he assures K., is only “attracted by guilt”; it “doesn’t seek [it] out . . . . That’s the Law.”  Id. at 8–9.  “I don’t know that law,” K. responds.  “You’ll feel it eventually,” the guard says.  Id. at 9. 

Such was the situation into which Frengel Reyes Mota, Andry Jose Hernandez Romero, and scores of other Venezuelan noncitizens say they were plunged on March 15, 2025.  In the early morning hours, Venezuelans held by the Department of Homeland Security at El Valle Detention Facility in Texas were awakened from their cells, taken to a separate room, shackled, and informed that they were being transferred.  See J.G.G. v. Trump, 2025 WL 1119481, at *2 (D.D.C. Apr. 16, 2025); ECF Nos. 44-9 (Karyn Ann Shealy Second Decl.), ¶¶ 7–8; 44-10 (Stephanie Quintero Decl.), ¶ 3; 44-11 (Grace Carney First Decl.), ¶ 11; 44-12 (Melissa Smyth Decl.), ¶ 13.  To where?  That they were not told.  See ECF No. 101 (Am. Compl.), ¶ 69; Smyth Decl., ¶ 13.  When asked, some guards reportedly laughed and said that they did not know; others told the detainees, incorrectly, that they were being transferred to another immigration facility or to Mexico or Venezuela.  See Shealy Second Decl., ¶ 10; Quintero Decl., ¶ 3; ECF Nos. 67-6 (Grace Carney Second Decl.), ¶ 3; 67-11 (Abigail Beckman Decl.), ¶ 9; 102-8 (D.A.R.H. Decl.), ¶ 8. 

Before long, Reyes Mota, Hernandez Romero, and the other detainees were shuttled onto buses, driven to a nearby airport, and loaded onto planes.  J.G.G, 2025 WL 1119481, at *2.  As the planes waited on the tarmac, many passengers aboard reportedly began to panic and beg officials for more information, but none was provided.  See Shealy Second Decl., ¶ 10.  The planes eventually departed that evening and, after a stop in Honduras, landed in El Salvador.  J.G.G., 2025 WL 1119481, at *4.  Upon their arrival, the detainees were transferred into a Salvadoran mega-prison known as the Center for Terrorism Confinement (CECOT).   

...

  Perhaps the President lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act.  Perhaps, moreover, Defendants are correct that Plaintiffs are gang members.  But — and this is the critical point — there is simply no way to know for sure, as the CECOT Plaintiffs never had any opportunity to challenge the Government’s say-so.  Defendants instead spirited away planeloads of people before any such challenge could be made.  And now, significant evidence has come to light indicating that many of those currently entombed in CECOT have no connection to the gang and thus languish in a foreign prison on flimsy, even frivolous, accusations.  See, e.g., Sánchez Decl., ¶ 6 (Reyes Mota); D.A.R.H. Decl., ¶¶ 6–7 (Hernandez Romero); ECF Nos. 67-10 (Paulina Reyes Decl.), Exh. A (Hernandez Romero); 102-9 (M.Z.V.V. Decl.), ¶ 6 (J.A.B.V.); 102-10 (M.Y.O.R. 

...

   In short, the Government must facilitate the Class’s ability to seek habeas relief to contest their removal under the Act.  Exactly what such facilitation must entail will be determined in future proceedings.  Although the Court is mindful that such a remedy may implicate sensitive diplomatic or national-security concerns within the exclusive province of the Executive Branch, it also has a constitutional duty to provide a remedy that will “make good the wrong done.”  Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 684 (1946). 

What Is Habeas Corpus?

 

HASSAN: What is habeas corpus?

NOEM: Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country

HASSAN: That's incorrect pic.twitter.com/ozRVVfdSoP

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 20, 2025