(评论)
(comments)

原始链接: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43768054

Hacker News上的一篇帖子讨论了Abrego García案,重点关注其对驱逐出境和人权的影响。 daft_pink提出了两个关键问题:(1)最高法院9-0的裁决是对保守派(限制行政权力以方便)的胜利,还是对自由派(强制执行驱逐出境)的胜利?(2)将某人驱逐到一个他们面临终身监禁的国家,实际上是一种替代性的终身监禁,是否违反了正当程序? scarecrowbob认为,美国长期以来对外国国民采取“引渡”和法外行动,通常以国家安全为幌子。他们断言,将驱逐出境作为监禁的替代手段已经发生,并且变得更加公开,用于恐吓异议者和被认为政治上不符合规范的人。 daft_pink回应说,他对驱逐拥有美国合法或非法居留权的人(即使是来自委内瑞拉的人)到他们面临监禁风险的国家的合法性没有得到更彻底的诉讼感到惊讶。

相关文章
  • (评论) 2025-03-30
  • (评论) 2025-03-30
  • (评论) 2025-04-08
  • (评论) 2025-04-19
  • (评论) 2025-04-17

  • 原文
    Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
    The Fourth Circuit's Opinion in the Abrego García Case (kemitchell.com)
    32 points by mplanchard 1 day ago | hide | past | favorite | 3 comments










    I have a couple questions about this case: 1. If you read conservative media, they consider this a win, because the supreme court 9-0 watered down the order down to facilitation, which they feel means the executive branch doesn’t need to do much on this case as the executive branch can’t force El Salvador to give up their citizen. Liberal media considers it a win for them, because the supreme court agrees 9-0 they must facilitate. Which take is correct? 2. Most of the legal analysis discusses other topics, but to me ultimate legal question is: Does the deportation of an individual by the United States government to a foreign country which may or may not be where they are citizens and where they are likely to face life imprisonment, violate their basic human rights to Due Process? => Or to put it in simpler english can you imprison someone for life by proxy by deporting them there?


    For context, the US has been renditioning folks for my entire life, and likely since the idea of national identity made it a category of treating humans.

    If you believe the various books on them (which I am not wholly sure I do but I don't find it unlikely) the CIA has always had sites to where it would pick up foreign nationals and move them, and then torture them or do literally whatever.

    That's largely what Guantanamo serves as, if I understand correctly.

    Historically (once again, if I understand correctly) that usually this was done for "national security" reasons, which I find to be not much of an excuse for destroying people via extra judicial means.

    Now the executive is claiming that deporting folks is an issue of that same national security.

    Additionally, they are claiming larger powers to do that kind of thing. And it certainly seems that they would like to do it for masses of people, out loud and in public, and ultimately to folks who have been stripped of citizenship in the same way that they have stripped legitimate green card and visa holders of their legitimate right to be in the country.

    To answer your question "Or to put it in simpler english can you imprison someone for life by proxy by deporting them":

    yes they have always done that (regardless of the legality of that action) and yes it is becoming a more overt attempt to terrify those of us who dissent or who aren't able to conform to their political ideology.



    I understand they have previously done that though before almost exclusively to non us persons for actions taken outside our borders. But I’m shocked this question doesn’t seem to be litigated as it seems blatantly wrong that they could do this to any documented or undocumented us resident living within our borders and even more of a stretch for Venezuelan citizens living within our country undocumented to be deported to their non home country.






    Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!


    Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact



    Search:
    联系我们 contact @ memedata.com