One of the more absurd contentions thrown at President Donald Trump and his administration is the idea that, in taking quick action to deport many illegal aliens, it hasn’t thoroughly respected their “due process” rights, and thus the deportations aren’t legitimate. Such was a contention the co-hosts of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” tried throwing at Trump on Tuesday, May 6, leading to their getting demolished by a guest who vindicated President Trump by taking a wrecking ball to their claims.
As background, the impetus behind the tiresome claims of the “Morning Joe” co-hosts was the Trump Administration’s deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the so-called “Maryland man” deported to El Salvador in mid-March, under the John Adams-era Alien Enemies Act that Trump invoked to deport those affiliated with gangs like MS-13 and Tren de Aragua. The Trump Administration alleged that Garcia was affiliated with MS-13.
Led in their outrage by leading Democratic Party politicians, some of whom have tried making “bring Kilmar home” a plank of the party’s platform, many in the media and on the left generally have reacted to that deportation with outrage, alleging that those deported under the act, even illegal alien gangsters, have due process rights that the Trump Administration didn’t respect.
Such is what “Morning Joe” co-hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski were screeching about on the Tuesday roundtable, alleging that the rights of gangsters who are here illegally are being violated with deportations, leading to guest attorney Danny Cevallos giving them a stern rebuke that vindicated the Trump approach.
Beginning his rebuttal, he noted that Trump is acting legally and the supposed rights of the illegal aliens don’t exist in the way the co-hosts were claiming, telling them, “Federal law allows for broader and even speedy removal [of illegal immigrants] and has been used in the past. And expedited removal as you talked about allows for summary removal. That means there’s no entitlement even to a hearing, possibly within 24 hours.”
Continuing, he noted that though the Trump Administration’s use of the law is somewhat broader than typically has been the case in the past, it is still legal. He said, “It hasn’t been used as broadly as, say, the Trump administration might want to use it, but […] it is permissible to remove aliens who arrive at the border and even those who have been here for two years.”
Building on that, Cevallos noted that just because the law has been used sparingly in the past doesn’t mean it isn’t the law, telling his co-panelists, “Just because it isn’t used very often doesn’t mean it’s not a part of federal law that can be used, and it will be used because it’s permitted under federal law.”
"*" indicates required fields
He then explained what the requirements are for utilizing the law, noting, “The Congress, in its infinite wisdom, decided that aliens who arrive at the border — and they define people who arrive at the border within two years — if they don’t have documents, if they have insufficient documents, they can be removed in an expedited fashion unless they seek asylum.”
Watch him here:
Featured image credit: screengrab from the embedded video