This 'College Protester' Isn't Real. It's an AI-Powered Undercover Bot for Cops

SCOTUS ruled in Mathews v. United States (1998) and in Jacobson v. United States (1992) that the government cannot induce a person to commit a crime, then arrest that individual for that crime.

Now the government is rolling out fully-automated entrapment bots.

The U.S. is currently disappearing people to foreign prisons, openly and in flagrant defiance of the courts. Trump has signalled he intends to expand this practice to include U.S. citizens (Just the worst convicted criminals currently in prison, of course.). If this administration can get away with all that, disappearing students who were entrapped by police will probably follow. Foreign students first, then Americans.

The lack of due process is a big problem, but what if the court in question issues an order that is impossible to legally comply with?

The United States has no jurisdiction over citizens of El Salvador in El Salvador. What is Trump supposed to do in this case, call up Pete Hegseth and order a commando style raid on the prison he’s being held in?

You are ignoring the part where we are paying el Salvador to keep them there. If it's a contract we enacted and pet for then yes we have leverage unlike what the government suggests

You’re ignoring the part where he’s not actually a “Maryland man” but instead a citizen of El Salvador that was in this country illegally. Now that he’s back in El Salvador the United States government has no jurisdiction over him. It’s entirely up to El Salvador. Just because a judge issued this order doesn’t make it a lawful order.

That’s like saying it’s entirely up to the restaurant to give you your food, so you have no control over what the kitchen does. The United States is paying them money for a service and has many other levers of considerable power, so it would be easy for an administration acting in good-faith to show that they made a request at a certain time and will cancel payment or escalate if it’s not honored.

I’m sorry but you can’t convince me that people in this country illegally shouldn’t be deported back to their country of origin. Particularly when they are affiliated with violent gangs like MS-13 and commit acts of domestic violence that cause their wife to get a restraining order against them.

I can empathize with why people would want to immigrate to this country, but they need to do so legally.

I'm not trying to convince you that illegal immigrants shouldn't be deported. What I would like to convince you is that any time the government takes action against a person, the government should have to prove their case in open court, and the person should have a fair chance to defend themselves.

Is this particular person MS-13? Did he have a legal right to be here? You don't know. None of us do, not for sure.

10 years ago, the idea that the government could sweep people off the streets and deliver them to a foreign prison with no trial or recourse would have been seen as absurd by every part of the political spectrum.

I think it's also absurd that the media is painting this guy as some innocent victim. He is an MS-13 gang member. He beat his wife, to the point that she filed a restraining order against him. There is evidence that he was engaging in human trafficking. Citizens have rights to trial. Those who have entered the country illegally do not have the same legal rights that citizens do.

>He is an MS-13 gang member. He beat his wife, to the point that she filed a restraining order against him. There is evidence that he was engaging in human trafficking.

Again, these are EXACTLY the sorts of allegations that should be adjudicated in court. Citizens and non-citizens all have the right to a fair trial before imprisonment.

If all this is true, why couldn't the government try and convict him of a crime?

Because they couldn't, of course. The evidence is made up and parroted by useful idiots to justify the end of the rule of law.