One of the Supreme Court’s most liberal justices has sided with the administration of President Donald Trump in a deportation case.
Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan denied a request from four Mexican nationals who asked the court to block their deportation orders so they could file an appeal.
Advertisement
“The petitioners, Fabian Lagunas Espinoza, Maria Angelica Flores Ulloa, and their two sons, were ordered to report to immigration officials on Thursday. Their legal team argued they face cartel violence if returned to Mexico,” the report said.
“According to their court filing, the family fled Guerrero, Mexico, in 2021, after being threatened by the Los Rojos drug cartel. The petition stated that cartel members demanded the family vacate their home within 24 hours or be killed,” it said.
Advertisement
The family also shared details of violence against other family members in their appeal, but an immigration judge denied it.
The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the decision in November 2023, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals validated the decision in February 2025.
“Petitioners face imminent removal and have been directed to report to immigration office on 4/17/2025, despite credible and detailed testimony and documentary evidence showing they are targets of cartel violence due to their family ties and refusal to comply with extortion demands,” LeRoy George, an attorney for the migrants, said in a petition to the court.
Kagan could have acted alone to keep the migrants in the United States or referred the case to the entire Supreme Court, choosing the former in denying the appeal without comment.
An expert legal analyst for Fox News said during a morning show segment on Thursday that she believes the federal judge at the center of a case involving a deported MS-13 gang member was “embarrassed” by a Supreme Court ruling taking the case out of his hands.
Kerri Urbahn also told “Fox & Friends” co-host Brian Kilmeade that Chief Judge James Boasberg’s decision to hold Trump administration officials in contempt of his order to return El Salvador citizen Kilmar Abrego Garcia from a high-security prison back to the U.S. smacked of desperation.
“So this is an interesting situation. You know, I’m not surprised we’re here because this judge seemed determined from the outset to hold him in contempt. Frankly, Brian, when I was reading the decision yesterday, I felt like it seemed a little desperate. I think the guy is embarrassed,” Urbahn began.
“He made this a very public thing for weeks. I can’t help but wonder if he thought the chief justice [John Roberts] was going to ultimately back him because, don’t forget, he had put out – the chief justice had put out that statement warning Trump and others, like, don’t criticize the judges. Let us handle things in the normal course,” she continued.
“I don’t know if that emboldened Judge Boasberg,” but the Supreme Court “didn’t” support him, she said. “They vacated his order. Finding – this should have been heard in Texas. Not before you in D.C., Judge Boasberg but yet, to your point, is he still demanding that the government comply with the order.”
“His argument is, even though the Supreme Court found” the way it did, “you should have obeyed this before they issued the order,” Urbahn explained. “The DoJ’s argument is you should have never issued this in the first place. This wasn’t your authority. It’s inherently invalid. The fact he is saying now I’m going to hold you in contempt however you can cure and it by the way that’s where it gets interesting, Brian.
“The way he is saying they can get rid of this potential contempt situation is by complying with what the Supreme Court told them to do the tda members and other people deported on planes still need to have the process they would have had before they were removed which is going to be done in Texas via habeas petition where they challenge the removal. So it’s a little strange,” she added.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
