Voters Think Immigrants Should Have Due Process

Monday, April 21, 2025

Over the last month, the Trump administration has ramped up its promise to carry out "mass deportations." ... Since then, hundreds of international students across the country have had their student visas revoked for a variety of alleged infractions, ranging from traffic violations to pro-Palestinian speech. In mid-March, the administration also deported more than 200 Venezuelan immigrants -- many with active asylum cases before courts -- whom it alleges to be gang members to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador, pointing to the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 as justification for bypassing the usual due process of law. Among them was Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was unlawfully deported due to an "administrative error." Despite acknowledging the error and the Supreme Court ruling in favor of his return, the Trump administration has refused to bring Abrego Garcia back to the U.S.

Posted by LampLighter at 08:32 PM | 57 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

NEW: Voters across party lines believe that immigrants with green cards or visas should have due process rights. www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/4/ ...

[image or embed]
-- Data for Progress (@dataforprogress.org) April 15, 2025 at 12:54 PM

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article...

... A new Data for Progress survey examined if voters support due process rights for immigrants, whether they are legal permanent residents with a green card or visa, or living here undocumented. Overall, voters strongly support affording due process rights to immigrants.

After being informed that some immigrants, like green card and visa holders, are not citizens, but are granted permission to live in the U.S. legally, voters were asked if they think immigrants with green cards and visas should or should not be afforded several constitutional rights.

Across the board, a strong majority of voters, including majorities across party lines, believe that

immigrants with green cards and visas should have the right to be informed of the charges against them (81%),

the right to a fair trial (77%),

the right to present a defense (75%),

and the right to appeal a court decision (69%). ...

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-04-21 01:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Due process should not be up for a vote.
That it is even open to question speaks epic volumes about the state this country is in.

#2 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2025-04-21 05:16 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Well, at least 21% of them do.

#3 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-04-21 08:50 PM | Reply

This is the issue that drives MAGAs completely nuts. They absolutely do NOT want so-called "illegal" immigrants to have the right to due process. Doing things fairly and the right way slows everything down. The right-wingers can't deal with any type of delay. Truly the chainsaw approach to important legal issues.

#4 | Posted by moder8 at 2025-04-21 08:52 PM | Reply

It's not surprising to see Republicans turn their back on the Constitution.

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-21 08:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"They absolutely do NOT want so-called "illegal" immigrants
#4 | Posted by moder8"

There is nothing so-called about it. They are here illegally and they are going back. Regardless of the new Democrat talking point being 'due process' after your poster boy turned out to be a 2x wife beating, gang member - the end result will be the same - they are going back.

#6 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-04-22 02:14 AM | Reply

Trump's the one with 34 felony convictions ... and he was able to skate from 3 more criminal trials by running for office again.

Who's Trump to call Garcia a "criminal" when Trump's the convicted felon?

#7 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2025-04-22 03:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The Constitution is not optional.

It covers EVERY PERSON (not citizen) on US soil.

Period.

#8 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-04-22 08:24 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Illegal immigrants aren't eligible for constitutional rights.

#9 | Posted by THEBULL at 2025-04-22 10:03 AM | Reply

"Due process should not be up for a vote."

There are 9 people who can apparently "vote" right now to eliminate it just like they apparently one day decided to vote for the elimination women's right to control what goes on in their own bodies.

#10 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-04-22 10:06 AM | Reply

Illegal immigrants aren't eligible for constitutional rights.

#9 | POSTED BY THEBULL

Apparently you weren't eligible for a fully functional brain.

#11 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-04-22 10:08 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

the end result will be the same - they are going back.

#6 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

So what are you afraid of then?

Bring him back. Grant him his rights to due process THEN ship him off to stash him in a foreign gulag.

IF the LAW allows for that.

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-04-22 10:10 AM | Reply

#4 | Posted by moder8 at 2025-04-21 08:52 PM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

Garcia had two, that's two, immigration hearings with Obama appointed judges. He was denied asylum both times. Is that not due process? I'm leaving out that his wife reported he beat her twice, had multiple run ins with the law including being part of a MS-13 gang murder investigation where he had a gun and a wad of cash, being pulled over with a car full of illegals and my favorite, saying he can't go back to El Salvador because he might get killed by a RIVAL GANG member. Now how can he be worried about a rival gang member if he isn't a gang member?
Moder8, there is a reason that you are a public defender, you need to be appointed because no one would hire you.

#13 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-04-22 10:24 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Trump's the one with 34 felony convictions ... and he was able to skate from 3 more criminal trials by running for office again.
Who's Trump to call Garcia a "criminal" when Trump's the convicted felon?

#7 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2025-04-22 03:44 AM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

Speaking of due process, the only reason the judge got the 34 felony convictions was because Trump's lawyers weren't allowed due process after the Judge changed the instructions to the jury.
And if you don't agree I'll make a wager with you, if the case isn't overturned on appeal I won't post for a year, if it is you won't post for a year.

#14 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-04-22 10:30 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings."
Antonin Scalia
Reno v. Flores (1993)

#15 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2025-04-22 10:30 AM | Reply

#7 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2025-04-22 03:44 AM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

Ok, so Gargia already had two hearings. Should we just keep having them like every week until some judge says he can stay?

#16 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-04-22 10:34 AM | Reply

#16 was a response to #15.

#17 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-04-22 10:34 AM | Reply

Voters Think Immigrants Should Have Due Process, Nazis disagree!

-FTFY

#18 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-04-22 10:45 AM | Reply

"Ok, so Gargia already had two hearings. Should we just keep having them like every week until some judge says he can stay?"

9-0.

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-22 10:58 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Due process should consist of the illegal being taken in front of a court, the judge asking if he is a US citizen. If the answer is no, they should be strapped into a human catapult and launched across the Southern border. Once landing in Mexico, they can file their appeal there.

#20 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-04-22 11:01 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"#16 | Posted by fishpaw"

It is not about "due process" - that is just their latest talking point. They want ZERO deportations - that has already been their plan. If they are not US citizens, deport them.

#21 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-04-22 11:03 AM | Reply

there is a "due process" to get into the country, but these Illegals choice not to do that.........so why should they get "due process" going out

#22 | Posted by Maverick at 2025-04-22 11:27 AM | Reply

#21 You can't, that would be following the law.

#23 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-04-22 11:27 AM | Reply

They want ZERO deportations - that has already been their plan.

#21 | Posted by ScottS

A stupid comment by a man willing to lie even about recent history.

#24 | Posted by Zed at 2025-04-22 11:28 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Due process should consist of the illegal being taken in front of a court, the judge asking if he is a US citizen.

#20 | Posted by ScottS

You do know that Trump isn't doing even this much?

Of course you do.

Fascist.

#25 | Posted by Zed at 2025-04-22 11:30 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

They want ZERO deportations - that has already been their plan.
#21 | Posted by ScottS
A stupid comment by a man willing to lie even about recent history.

#24 | Posted by Zed at 2025-04-22 11:28 AM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

How many illegal crossing in March of this year vs last year. I'll give your Mom a minute to look it up and tell you.

#26 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-04-22 11:41 AM | Reply

#26 | Posted by fishpaw

Donald Trump lies about everything and immigration is what he likes to lie about the most.

Come on, be real. There's never going to be any reason to trust Trump on any issue he has a stake in.

#27 | Posted by Zed at 2025-04-22 12:07 PM | Reply

They absolutely do NOT want so-called "illegal" immigrants to have the right to due process.

I don't know why this is so misunderstood.

Garcia had a "removal order", which means he went through due process. In fact he had a "withholding of removal" which IMO is insane, but allows one to defer removal.

The question is, a "WoR" is not permanent residence. When the "WoR" was ordered the country looked alot different. So how does a "WoR" get withdrawn? Who has this authority.

Withholding of removal also does not offer permanent protection or a path to permanent residence. If
conditions improve in a person's home country, the government can revoke withholding of removal and again
seek the person's deportation. This can occur even years after a person is granted protection.
www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org

#28 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-04-22 12:07 PM | Reply

26 | Posted by fishpaw

Yeah, I know.

It's sad that concepts like "dishonesty" and "lack of character" have real-life implications.

I know that you will hold on to your fantasies until someone claws them from your cold, dead hands.

#29 | Posted by Zed at 2025-04-22 12:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

which means he went through due process.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you 9-0.

#30 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-04-22 12:16 PM | Reply

I look forward to your well thought out rebuttal: a copy paste job from x.com that's BS.

#31 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-04-22 12:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"which means he went through due process."

Two things are going on here:

The first is that you don't know what Due Process is.

The second is that if you knew what Due Process was, you wouldn't agree that people should get Due Process.

What this adds up to is you saying he already got Due Process, which is wrong.

What you ought to be saying is he never should have gotten any Due Process to begin with.

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-22 12:23 PM | Reply

"How many illegal crossing in March of this year vs last year. I'll give your Mom a minute to look it up and tell you."

The concept that there are worse things than illegal crossings will never occur to you.

The idea of Opportunity Cost is something you have never thought about.

Legal crossings are down too. Can you tell us why the reduction in legal crossings is a good price to pay for reduced illegal crossings?

No, you can't, because you have never thought about it and you never will.

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-22 12:28 PM | Reply

How many illegal crossing in March of this year vs last year. I'll give your Mom a minute to look it up and tell you.

#26 | Posted by fishpaw

No one knows.

We only keep track of Encounters with non-citizens...which is mainly people asking for asylum or scheduling appointments to meet with immigration offices at the border for asylum.

Since Trump got rid of those scheduling options, the number of encounters has dropped (because they aren't appointments).

But number of illegal crossings that aren't here for asylum? Who knows? If 20 people cross in the night and no one sees them, how do we count them? Maybe they would have been applying for asylum during Biden's time but now...completely undocumented and uncounted. Good Job, Trump.

As an Immigration "Expert", I'm surprised you don't know this. (No one is actually surprised.)

#34 | Posted by Sycophant at 2025-04-22 12:36 PM | Reply

#14 | Posted by fishpaw

You literally just described Due Process...

A JUDGE. TRUMP'S LAWYERS being able to object and appeal.

That's literal Due Process.

#35 | Posted by Sycophant at 2025-04-22 12:40 PM | Reply

I don't know why this is so misunderstood.

As usual, you got it wrong. Again. Such a pattern with you. Almost an art-form. Even with the very words right in front of you you can't connect the dots. Stunning.

"If conditions improve in a person's home country, the government can revoke withholding of removal and again
seek the person's deportation."

Your problem is you think the government is Trump. It is not. He is only one part of it. Due process required an adjudication that the conditions have improved and the restriction be lifted by the court before the government can proceed with deportation. This is not rocket science. It's not even physics 101. It's not high-school physics. It's basic english comprehension couple with a rudimentary understanding of our Constitution.

#36 | Posted by YAV at 2025-04-22 12:49 PM | Reply

Ok, so Gargia already had two hearings. Should we just keep having them like every week until some judge says he can stay?

#16 | Posted by fishpaw

The also granted him protection from deportation. Why did you leave that part out?

This is WHY we have Due Process. You take him before a Judge and get an Order for Deportation. The Judge says "Hey, there is no evidence he is a gang member and/or he is already protected from deportation. Deportation Denied."

This Error occurred because people like you and Trump are idiots. What you IDIOTS do is say, "Hey, we are deporting this guy and that's that. We don't need to follow the law and get an Order for Deportation."

Then you end up violating a court order and can't even begin to defend it.

#37 | Posted by Sycophant at 2025-04-22 12:50 PM | Reply

which means he went through due process.
The Supreme Court disagrees with you 9-0.

#30 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-04-22 12:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

That was regarding shipping him to El Salvador, they voted that the US Government has to "facilitate" his return which in other words allow his return if Salvador ships him back. Then when he gets here he gets to be shipped out again. And btw, he's not supposed to be shipped to El Salvador because he thinks he will be killed by a rival gang. How can he be killed by a rival gang if he's not in a gang?

#38 | Posted by fishpaw at 2025-04-22 12:55 PM | Reply

"That was regarding shipping him to El Salvador, they voted that the US Government has to "facilitate" his return"

You need to finish the thought, lazy man.

Why is the United States is ordered to facilitate his return?
So that the United States can give him Due Process he was wrongfully and illegally denied.

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-22 01:01 PM | Reply

there is a "due process" to get into the country, but these Illegals choice not to do that.........so why should they get "due process" going out
#22 | Posted by Maverick

There's laws against murdering people, but criminals don't follow them, so why can't I murder people too?

Same energy.

#40 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-22 01:04 PM | Reply

So that the United States can give him Due Process he was wrongfully and illegally denied.

This is false, because you, and SCOTUS can't describe what "due process" means in this case.

Tell me what the "due process" is for removing someone with a "witholding of removal"?

As i stated above the government just needs to "say" the country of origin has improved since the WoR was given.

What else is there?

#41 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-04-22 01:05 PM | Reply

There's laws against murdering people, but criminals don't follow them, so why can't I murder people too?
Same energy.

So what, this is a poor man straw man.

#42 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-04-22 01:07 PM | Reply

The also granted him protection from deportation.

NOT FOREVER it does not GRANT PERMANENT RESIDENCY.

Only until the Government ascertains conditions improved in the country of origin. Then the GOVERNMENT can remove the "withholding of removal".

IT ISNT ASYLUM

#43 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-04-22 01:09 PM | Reply

"NOT FOREVER"

Just until Due Process.

What...Constitutional protections too much to ask???

#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-04-22 01:12 PM | Reply

"This is false, because you, and SCOTUS can't describe what "due process" means in this case."

The Supreme Court understands what Due Process means.

You are the one who doesn't understand it and doesn't believe in it.

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-22 01:13 PM | Reply

there is a "due process" to get into the country, but these Illegals choice not to do that.........so why should they get "due process" going out

That is the stupidest thing I have seen published on this site in quite a while. Truly ignorant and bigoted in so many ways.

#46 | Posted by YAV at 2025-04-22 01:13 PM | Reply

"this is a poor man straw man."

Maybe because that's not a strawman; it's a parallel example.

#47 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-04-22 01:14 PM | Reply

You are the one who doesn't understand it and doesn't believe in it.

Yeah, I explained it pretty damn clearly in my post, but that poster doesn't have the mental capacity to grasp the basics. Look at what was posted in #43. Sheesh.

#48 | Posted by YAV at 2025-04-22 01:15 PM | Reply

"NOT FOREVER"

"Just until Due Process."

The concept of a Leader having to follow the rules is completely lost on them.

They believe the Leader makes the rules.

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-22 01:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Tell me what the "due process" is for removing someone with a "witholding of removal"?
As i stated above the government just needs to "say" the country of origin has improved since the WoR was given.
What else is there?

#41 | Posted by oneironaut

Idiot.

This is so ridiculously easy.

You schedule a hearing to review the Order to Withhold from Removal. You present evidence as to why the Order should be lifted.

THAT'S DUE PROCESS. It's what Trump didn't do and SCOTUS said he had to.

How hard is that?

#50 | Posted by Sycophant at 2025-04-22 01:24 PM | Reply

They believe the Leader makes the rules.

So does he.

#51 | Posted by REDIAL at 2025-04-22 01:25 PM | Reply

"Tell me what the "due process" is for removing someone with a "witholding of removal"?"

Well, for starters, there's Habeas Corpus.

We haven't even achieved that threshold.

#52 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-04-22 01:26 PM | Reply

"...for starters, there's Habeas Corpus."

Corpus? We ain't got no corpus! We don't need no corpus!! We don't have to show you any steeeenkin' corpus!!!
~Treasure of the Sierra MAGAts.

#53 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-04-22 01:43 PM | Reply

Any stats out there that indicate if people are "self-deporting"? If so, in what numbers? What nationalities seem to be doing so in the greatest numbers?

#54 | Posted by Karabekian at 2025-04-22 01:49 PM | Reply

And btw, he's not supposed to be shipped to El Salvador because he thinks he will be killed by a rival gang. How can he be killed by a rival gang if he's not in a gang?

#38 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Typical maga maroon.

When you have nothing you lie.

an immigration judge barred him from being sent to El Salvador. The order said he proved he had a "well-founded fear of future persecution" from local gangs, and he was granted a withholding of removal to the country, which allowed him to stay in the United States temporarily and receive a work permit.

an immigration judge barred him from being sent to El Salvador.

So they sent him to El Salvador.

Take your lies and shove them right up there where the sun don't shine.

#55 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-04-22 01:59 PM | Reply

And btw, he's not supposed to be shipped to El Salvador because he thinks he will be killed by a rival gang. How can he be killed by a rival gang if he's not in a gang?
#38 | POSTED BY FISHPAW
Typical maga maroon.
When you have nothing you lie.
an immigration judge barred him from being sent to El Salvador. The order said he proved he had a "well-founded fear of future persecution" from local gangs, and he was granted a withholding of removal to the country, which allowed him to stay in the United States temporarily and receive a work permit.
an immigration judge barred him from being sent to El Salvador.
So they sent him to El Salvador.
Take your lies and shove them right up there where the sun don't shine.
#55 | Posted by donnerboy

Isn't cute how Fishy lies and adds "rival" in front of gang?

#56 | Posted by Sycophant at 2025-04-22 02:05 PM | Reply

Posted by fishpaw

Ineducable, untrainable, level of stupid.

#57 | Posted by Angrydad at 2025-04-22 04:49 PM | Reply