The Case For Not Correcting The "Mistake" Of Deporting An El Salvadoran To El Salvador

This is a battle between Article II and Article III authorities, but the better case rests with the President's view of foreign policy needs. - Shipwreckedcrew 
Let me start with some undisputed facts.

• First, Kilmar Abrego Garcia was an illegal alien found by the Immigration Courts to be subject to removal from the United States. He has no right to return to or remain in the United States.
• Second, all during the removal proceedings Abrego Garcia was detained. The initial detention was based upon a finding — supported by the evidence presented — that he was a member of MS-13. That finding was later upheld by the Bureau of Immigration Appeals...
• Third, after being detained pending removal, Abrego Garcia sought three forms of relief in connection with the Order of Removal — he sought asylum, he sought protection under the Convention Against Torture, and he sought Withholding of Removal...

His asylum claim was rejected because it was filed more than one year after he entered the US — he was in the U.S. for seven years, from 2012 to 2019, before he applied. 

His claim under the Convention Against Torture was denied because he could not make a factual basis in 2019 that he had a fear of torture by the Salvadoran government, and that is the harm to be avoided under the CAT.
Finally, he was granted “Withholding of Removal” — WOR. Much like asylum claims, WOR is based on a fear of persecution if returned to one’s home country. But while asylum grants the right to remain in the U.S., the relief under WOR is to not be returned to your own country — you still get deported...