CNN Takes Apart Trump Admin Claims They Won Supreme Court Ruling on Wrongly Deported Man

CNN senior reporter Daniel Dale dissected Trump administration claims about a Supreme Court ruling on Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the wrongly deported Maryland man being held in El Salvador.

Trump met with El Salvador President Nayib Bukele in the Oval Office for a photo op on Monday, during which Trump openly feuded with CNN anchor and senior White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins, over the Garcia ruling, at one point tagging in Trump Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller to bolster a raft of dubious claims about the case.

Miller has also claimed on Fox News this week that the mistake was not a mistake.

On Tuesday’s edition of CNN’s The Situation Room, anchors Pamela Brown and Wolf Blitzer hosted Dale to fact-check the administration’s claims about the ruling:

BROWN: The Abrego Garcia case, it is emblematic of a larger issue, right, that the bounds of executive power, how far can it go as it pertains to immigration policy? The White House has put out some confusing and contradictory statements since Abrego Garcia was supported to El — deported to El Salvador by mistake.

It’s a lot to keep up with, so we wanted to bring in our senior reporter, Daniel Dale, with a fact-check to help us understand, what are the facts?

So, Daniel, from the beginning, the White House has admitted in court filings that this man was sent to El Salvador by mistake. But listen to what one of president’s — the president’s top aides, Stephen Miller, told FOX.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHEN MILLER: He was not mistakenly sent to El Salvador.

BILL HEMMER: OK.

MILLER: A DOJ lawyer, who has since been relieved of duty, a saboteur, a Democrat, put into a filing incorrectly that this was a mistaken removal. It was not. This was the right person sent to the right place.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So, what are the facts here?

DALE: Pam, Mr. Miller’s suggestion that some lefty saboteur at DOJ is the reason people are calling this deportation a mistake is just wrong.

Various Trump administration officials have also called it a mistake. So here are the facts. Mr. Abrego Garcia was under a 2019 court order that said he could not be sent back to El Salvador because he had a credible fear of facing persecution from gang violence in that country.

And then this year, of course, the Trump administration did send him back to El Salvador. Now, the particular career DOJ attorney Mr. Miller is calling a Democratic plant who was quickly put on leave after he expressed frustration with the administration in court over the case did say this deportation should not have happened.

But he wasn’t going rogue in saying that. ICE and DOJ officials have told the courts at least three other times that sending Mr. Abrego Garcia to El Salvador was an error.

First, in March, acting ICE Field Office Director Robert Cerna told the court under penalty of perjury that it was a — quote — “administrative error.” Then, this month, DOJ lawyers, including senior officials appointed by Trump, told an appeals court — quote — “He was sent to that country due to an administrative error.”

And then, days later, the solicitor general, John Sauer, the Trump- appointed lawyer who represents the administration at the Supreme Court, so a top lawyer, told the Supreme Court — quote — “The United States concedes that removal to El Salvador was an administrative error.”

So Mr. Miller pinning the idea that this was an error on one sneaky Democratic plant at the Justice Department is nonsense.

BROWN: All right.

So the Supreme Court’s ruling backed in part the previous district judge’s order that requires the Trump administration to — quote — “facilitate” — there’s a lot of emphasis on that word — the return of Abrego Garcia.

But in the Oval Office yesterday, Miller made it sound like the White House came out on top in this ruling. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MILLER: It was a 9-0…

TRUMP: In our favor?

MILLER: … in our favor against the district court ruling, saying that no district court has the power to compel the foreign policy function of the United States.

As Pam said, the ruling solely stated that, if this individual, at El Salvador’s sole discretion, was sent back to our country, that we could deport him a second time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: All right, what are the facts here?

DALE: There are a bunch of issues with Mr. Miller’s description of that ruling.

I encourage people to read it for themselves. It’s pretty short. So, four things here. First of all, Miller did not mention that the ruling said the Trump administration has to — quote — “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador.

The ruling did also say the administration is owed — quote — “deference” in foreign affairs. But the court explicitly said they have to facilitate him getting out of jail in El Salvador. Now, the administration is arguing, as you guys have talked about, that the order to facilitate doesn’t mean they actually have to do anything at all to get him out of this foreign prison.

They argue that, in the context of immigration law, facilitate just means they have to take domestic steps to make sure he can get back into the U.S. if El Salvador independently chose to release him. It’s not clear how that’s going to fly in the courts. Regardless, it’s not what the plain language of that Supreme Court ruling says.

And, second, that wasn’t the end of the ruling. The Supreme Court also wrote — quote — “that the government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps.”

And, so far, the administration has been sharing only the vaguest, slimmest of steps updates to the district court judge who ordered those updates.

Third of all, it’s worth noting the Supreme Court did not explicitly guarantee that Mr. Abrego Garcia can be deported again. It simply wrote his case should be — quote — “handled as if it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.”

Now, that might very well mean deportation. CNN and others have reported he is deportable to anywhere other than El Salvador, but the Supreme Court didn’t actually state anything about a second deportation.

And then, fourth and finally, regarding Mr. Miller’s claim of a 9-0 ruling, the Supreme Court’s three liberals actually signed on to a statement saying they would have let stand the district court ruling that required the government not only to facilitate Mr. Abrego Garcia’s release from custody, but to — quote — “effectuate” his return to the U.S. within days.

The liberals wrote that it’s plainly wrong to say the U.S. government cannot do anything to help someone once a deportee crosses the border from the U.S.

So this suggestion from Mr. Miller that all nine justices are on board with his own claims about the limits of the administration’s responsibilities and powers here is clearly not true.

BROWN: Yes, right.

On that note, I’m just reading. It’s only four pages. The liberal justices said: “I agree with the court’s order that the proper remedy is to provide Abrego Garcia with all the process to which he would have been entitled had he not been unlawfully removed to El Salvador.”

DALE: Right.

BROWN: There’s a hearing later today. A lot at stake there.

Daniel Dale, thank you so much — Wolf.

BLITZER: I love it when Daniel Dale does some serious fact-checking for us. He’s so good.

BROWN: Right. And it’s important, because there’s so much being thrown around. And it’s complicated.

BLITZER: Right.

BROWN: And I just think it’s important to look at the facts.

BLITZER: And he does, and does a great job.

Watch above via CNN’s The Situation Room.