Of Snacks and Supreme Court Suggestions

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/10/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-deported-migrant.html

("Supreme Court Sides With Deported Migrant and Orders Steps to Return Him")

“Facilitate” (but, wink, wink, possibly not be compelled to “effectuate”) the return of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia from a prison in El Salvador. Sure, no problem.

Except, in the past, Donald Trump, despite a mandate to do so, couldn't even seem to “facilitate and effectuate” the return of boxes, taken from the White House, sitting in his bathroom in Florida.

This Supreme Court ruling will have as much effect on the President as my telling my granddaughter she can't eat any more snacks because it might spoil her dinner.

Mr. Abrego Garcia rots in a prison in a foreign land because he committed the mortal sin of wearing the wrong basketball team's hat. If only he were a Knick fan, the administration surely would not have played a game of snatch and deport with him.

The absolute egregiousness of this conduct is now couched in phrases like "deference owed to the executive branch" and "exclusive prerogative of the President."

Human life, for large segments of the population, is without meaning or worth in the eyes of those like Mr. Trump. Mere collateral damage here. "Sorry, my bad."

Eventually, when he got around to it, Mr. Trump returned some of the wrongly removed confidential papers, maybe even those resting in his bathroom. And maybe, just maybe someday Mr. Abrego Garcia will get back to the United States. If and when Mr. Trump decides he is in the mood to make this happen.

The order of the Supreme Court, given as mere suggestion to a man who takes them as lightly as my granddaughter does my admonition on snacks, is not worth the paper it was printed on.