|
The Abduction of Kilmar Abrego Garcia Is Not About Politics
Forget
about the poll numbers regarding immigration. Democrats can focus on
the economy and defend the Constitution at the same time.
by Bill Scher
Pragmatism
is a worthy principle in politics. If parties can’t win elections, they
can’t shape policy. To win elections, parties need to build coalitions
of base voters plus swing voters. Since issues that motivate base voters
don’t always move swing voters, sometimes politicians need to emphasize
issue positions with broad resonance and downplay those with narrower
ideological appeal. So it’s understandable why some House Democrats are,
albeit anonymously, expressing concern about the electoral efficacy of
emphasizing the plight of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the immigrant, husband,
and father who Donald Trump shipped to an El Salvador prison and is
refusing to retrieve in defiance of court orders.
“I know it's an important issue, but should it be the big issue for Democrats? Probably not,” one anonymous House Democrat told Axios,
“I think we ought to focus on the basic things that affect people on a
day-to-day basis.” “Rather than talking about the tariff policy and the
economy,” said another unnamed representative, “we're going to go take the bait for one hairdresser.”
(Garcia
is not a hairdresser; this is likely a reference to Andry Hernandez
Romero, a Venezuelan migrant and hair stylist who crossed the border
last year and applied for asylum but appears to have been mistaken by
the Trump administration for a gang member and now is also incarcerated
in El Salvador.)
But
Democrats should not be looking at wrongful abductions by the federal
government through an electoral prism. This is not about how to win an
election. This is about human decency and constitutional preservation.
If we can’t stop a rogue President from asserting the power to disappear
people to prisons outside America’s jurisdiction without any due
process, then the entire experiment of American democracy is over.
Democrats
in the congressional minority have no direct power to demand the Trump
administration to retrieve Garcia or any of the other immigrants
deported and incarcerated in El Salvador without judicial hearings. That
job falls to the justices of the Supreme Court. Their recent finding
that the administration must “facilitate” Garcia’s return but stopping
short of specifying the consequences of failure to comply, suggests the
Justices do believe Garcia should be back in his Maryland home but are
hesitant to give the president an opportunity to instigate a genuine
Constitutional crisis. This is where Democrats can step in—by sustaining
media attention on the case and making it harder for the Supreme Court
to timidly slow-walk the process.
What
if the politics of the issue are really bad for the Democrats? Not only
would that harm the party’s ability to win the 2026 and 2028 elections,
but it may also take pressure off the Supreme Court and make it less
likely to demand action from the Trump administration.
In
his Substack newsletter, pundit Chris Cillizza expressed sympathy for
the political argument that Democrats best stay out of it:
I
am not sure that making a massive issue out of the Garcia case is
politically smart of Democrats. Here’s why: The average person isn’t
aware of every detail in the case. They broadly agree with the sentiment
that people here illegally should be returned to their country of
origin. And they very much agree with the idea that if you are a) here
illegally and b) affiliated with a violent gang, you should be removed
from the country.
Now,
as I said, there is no proof that Garcia is a member of MS-13. A
confidential informant suggested that Garcia might be a member of a gang
but courts have not been moved by that. But, the Trump administration
is successfully muddying the waters here....
...
politically speaking, my guess is that the Trump team likes the basic
dynamic of this fight, which is: “Democrats are pushing for a guy who
came into the country illegally and who may or may not be a gang member
to be sent back to the U.S. while Trump is cracking down on people like
this who never should have been in the country in the first place.”
But Cillizza’s premises are flawed.
The
average person need not be aware of every detail of the case to know
the main detail of the case that is repeated in nearly every media
account: the Trump administration admitted Garcia’s deportation was an
“administrative error” because he had a legal status.
Garcia came to America from El Salvador illegally when he was a minor to escape death threats from gangs. Six years ago, he received a “withholding of removal,” which meant that Garcia could not be deported to El Salvador—because an immigration judge held he had “well-founded fear of future persecution”
there—and he could get a legal work permit in the United States (though
in theory he could be deported elsewhere if another country was willing
to take him.)
The
public may “broadly agree with the sentiment that people here illegally
should be returned to their country of origin,” but we shouldn’t assume
they agree that people here legally should be incarcerated in their country of origin.
And
we shouldn’t assume that just because the public doesn’t like illegal
immigration in general that they won’t be repulsed when immigrants have
their basic human rights violated. Just seven years ago we saw the
public reject Trump’s policy of family separations at the border so vehemently that Trump was compelled to abandon the policy.
The
voting public rejected family separations even though no voting
citizen, safely living in America’s interior, ran the risk of having
their own kids taken from them while crossing the border. The Garcia
case raises a concern potentially far more unsettling to average voters.
The Trump administration is arguing that even when it makes a mistake
by sending someone legally in America to a foreign prison without any
due process, it should not have to get that person back. He can play
disingenuous word games with the president of El Salvador in the Oval
Office where each can act like they have no power to fix an obvious and
acknowledged mistake that is ruining the life of a human being and his
family.
Any
one of us could face this horror. The federal government—not currently
run by the most competent folks—could snatch you because your name is
the same as someone else slated for deportation, or you look like
someone else on the list, or you were hanging out with the wrong group
of people and got swept up in a chaotic raid. And you would have no
opportunity to plead your case before a judge.
This
is not just my hyperbolic doomsaying. On Wednesday, Fourth Circuit
Court of Appeals Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, a Ronald Reagan
appointee, issued an opinion demanding
compliance by the Trump administration in the Garcia case, wherein he
concluded, “If today the Executive claims the right to deport without
due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there
be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim
responsibility to bring them home?”
He’s
right. Which is why Democrats should not look at poll numbers about
general immigration sentiments and conclude the Garcia case and its
horrific particulars is a political loser. The party has a moral and
constitutional case to make against the Trumpian authoritarian approach
to government. For that case to have any legitimacy—for it to not be
dismissed as cheap political point scoring—Democrats must act on the
principles they have long articulated.
Throughout
the 2024 campaign, Democrats warned that if elected Trump would behave
like a dictator and undermine the foundations of American democracy.
They were right, and now he is. It’s not the time to act as if
constitutional checks and balances are no longer important because it
doesn’t poll as well as some other issue.
Will
the 2026 and 2028 elections more likely turn on the economy? Yes. Isn’t
it the case that Trump is sandbagging the economy with arbitrary
tariffs? Yes. Shouldn’t Democrats focus on that? Yes. But Democrats can
do that while also calling out Trump’s abuses of power.
In
fact, Democrats can easily tie Trump’s disregard for the economy with
his disregard for Garcia’s human rights. They can say, “Instead of
lowering our prices like he promised to do, Trump and his Republican
allies are obsessed with raising the cost of all imported goods and
abducting people legally in America and sending them to foreign
prisons.”
Fortunately, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries
have unequivocally stated Garcia should be returned home. They should
continue to set that tone and encourage their colleagues to keep up the
pressure until justice is done.
Click here to read this article on washingtonmonthly.com
Bill Scher is the Politics Editor of the Washington Monthly. |