Guilherme Botacini
BRASILIA, DF (Folhapress)-President Donald Trump’s response to the US court’s request for more details about the deportation of hundreds of Venezuelan migrants was “unfortunately insufficient,” the federal judge in Washington James Boasberg, responsible for the case.
The magistrate evaluates whether the management of the Republican disobeyed his order to block the deportations and gave five days, until next Tuesday (25), so that the government explains why the failure to paralyze the removal of migrants would not have violated the court order.
The judge’s decision requiring government explanations deepens the clash between the White House and American Justice after a series of decrees and measures of Trump are blocked by federal judges of the first instance.
The Republican and his allies, such as billionaire Elon Musk, have climbed the tone of criticism of the judges responsible for blocking orders, to the point of defending the impeachment of these magistrates on the grounds that they interfere with the executive branch improperly.
In a rare criticism of Trump, the country’s Supreme Court President John Roberts said on Tuesday that asking for a judge to disagree with his decisions is not an “appropriate response.”
American experts are already alert that the increasingly shrill clash between the presidents and threats of the president not to comply with court decisions have the potential to cause a serious constitutional crisis in the country.
Trump, in turn, despite the criticism and brave against the judiciary, said in the middle of the clash that he would not challenge any court order.
Bomberg had said earlier that he was just trying to determine whether the government had violated its injunction (temporary) order to block the deportation flights on the same day the flights occurred last Saturday (15).
So far, audiences during the week only sought details such as flight schedules, under what law the government deported immigrants and other information that would serve as a substrate for the judge’s final decision.
The temporary blockade occurred after a process opened by civil organizations against the use of an 18th century war law as the basis for deportations -Trump government argues that the Venezuelan gang Tren from Argua, treated by the White House as a terrorist group, conducts “an irregular war and takes hostile actions against the US.”
This Thursday’s order is the first in this case to directly demand that Trump management explains whether or not it violated Bomberg’s initial order by continuing with deportation flights despite the judicial blockade.
Hearings during this week were marked by measures seen by republican critics as provocative and challenging to the judiciary. Government lawyers filed documents by saying that they would not answer questions from the magistrate and that the judge should be removed from the case due to “highly unusual and inadequate procedures.”
Government defense said it would not share the information for national security reasons, without detailing the reasons for it, and suggested that flights were already on the air when the order of blocking was given, although this argument was not accepted by the court. The White House states that it acted within the law.
