Rachel Abrams

Today, my colleague Adam Liptak on the Maryland man who was mistakenly sent to a notoriously brutal prison in El Salvador and what his case, which tests the limit of presidential power, means for the rule of law. It's Tuesday, April 15th. So, Adam, we have talked a lot on this show about the Trump administration's efforts to crack down on immigration and deport people really quickly.

We've talked about the Venezuelan migrants, students at Columbia and other schools. But today we want to zero in on one case in particular, this man from Maryland. Can you start by telling us who is he and how did he end up where he is?

We've talked about the Venezuelan migrants, students at Columbia and other schools. But today we want to zero in on one case in particular, this man from Maryland. Can you start by telling us who is he and how did he end up where he is?

At the government.

At the government.

Just because they admitted a mistake?

Just because they admitted a mistake?

So what does the Maryland judge say about all of this?

So what does the Maryland judge say about all of this?

And can we just pause here for a second before we get to the facilitate and effectuate language? Why does the judge say that this shocks the conscience? Like, what exactly is she finding so egregious about all of this?

And can we just pause here for a second before we get to the facilitate and effectuate language? Why does the judge say that this shocks the conscience? Like, what exactly is she finding so egregious about all of this?

And so how does the government respond to all of this? What is the case that they're making exactly about why they deported this man?

And so how does the government respond to all of this? What is the case that they're making exactly about why they deported this man?

So then what happens next?

So then what happens next?

And in practical terms, what does this mean for the government's obligation, this distinction between effectuate and facilitate?

And in practical terms, what does this mean for the government's obligation, this distinction between effectuate and facilitate?

So basically, it's the difference between a should and a must. The court is basically saying, do everything you can, but if you ultimately can't bring him back, then you've fulfilled your obligation.

So basically, it's the difference between a should and a must. The court is basically saying, do everything you can, but if you ultimately can't bring him back, then you've fulfilled your obligation.

It also feels like the ruling gives the administration some leeway, right? Because the ruling is basically telling the government, please try. So if the government, for example, you know, says, well, look, we called up the president of El Salvador and we asked him nicely and he said no, we did our job. That's the end of it, right? Yeah.