Venezuela-hired lawyers file petition in El Salvador aimed at freeing Venezuelans deported by US
SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador — Lawyers hired by the Venezuelan government filed a legal action Monday in El Salvador aimed at freeing 238 Venezuelans deported by the United States who are being held in a Salvadoran maximum-security prison.
Jaime Ortega, who says he represents 30 of the imprisoned Venezuelans, said they filed the habeas corpus petition with the Supreme Court's Constitutional Chamber. He said that by extension they requested that it be applied to all Venezuelans detained in El Salvador.
The maneuver essentially compels the government to prove someone's detention was justified.
The Salvadoran government has been silent about the status of the Venezuelan prisoners since the U.S. government sent them more than a week ago, despite a U.S. federal judge's verbal order to turn the planes around.
The Trump administration is using an 18th-century wartime law to justify sending the Venezuelans, who it says were members of the Tren de Aragua gang, which the administration declared an invading force.
'We represent at this moment 30 Venezuelans who have given us the power to act, but by extension, we are asking for habeas corpus for the rest of the Venezuelan citizens who are detained in our country,' Ortega said.
Salvador Ríos, another lawyer with the firm, said they were contracted by the Venezuelan government and the Families of Immigrants Committee in Venezuela. He said the Venezuelans they represent are not members of the Tren de Aragua and had migrated from their country and 'don't have any criminal record.'
In February, El Salvador President Nayib Bukele offered to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio to imprison U.S. deportees or even U.S. citizens serving prison sentences. The U.S. is paying El Salvador to hold them for what both governments say is a cost savings.
But lawyers in both countries have questioned the legal justification for sending migrants who have not been convicted or in many cases even charged with a crime to prison in a foreign country.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
19 minutes ago
- Spectator
‘Trans rights' has never been a civil rights issue
Indisputably a nutjob, Chase Strangio is the soul of nominative determinism. The lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union is a 'trans man' – meaning a woman, of course; one of the trans movement's lesser impositions is forcing consumers of pliant media to keep translating wishful thinking into real life, much as the unhip once had to keep remembering that 'super-bad' means 'super-good'. Strangio is a rare example of sexual disguise that is reasonably persuasive. The 42-year-old woman passes for a certain kind of man: weedy, slight and very short, with narrow shoulders, Marx Brothers eyebrows, just-credible facial hair, a tight fade over the ears bursting into a cocky skywards coiffure, and a chronically smarmy, self-satisfied expression. Strangio comes across as nerdy, weak and perplexingly vain. Plenty of bona fide males out there fit that general description while to all appearances failing to embody the once-prized attributes of traditional masculinity. At a glance, Strangio belongs to that benighted class of weirdos, wimps and wusses – the ultimate swipe-left. So much trouble and expense lavished on passing as a male sissy, when the lawyer might have made a respectable broad. Is it perversity or hypocrisy? Strangio resents that alphabet land is dominated by the 'gay white men' whose appearance she is aping, decries the Supreme Court – before which she has just appeared – as a 'vile institution', believes as a lawyer that law is 'not a dignified system' and, typically, is highly invested in the alchemy of having changed sex yet does not believe in the existence of sex. 'A penis is not a male body part,' she claims. 'It's just an unusual body part for a woman.' Behold, Exhibit B for the Democrats' foisting of crackpots into positions of responsibility (granted, Donald Trump has form in that regard as well). Naturally, Exhibit A is Admiral 'Rachel' Levine, who may single-handedly have convinced Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine, because the US military was then apparently a joke. Before the Supreme Court, Strangio headed the ACLU case against Tennessee, which had banned puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and sex-change surgeries for minors. Last week's 6-3 decision in Tennessee's favour rescues similar laws in 26 other states, which prevent doctors from neutering, mutilating and disrupting the maturation of underage patients suffering under the contagious misapprehension that they are not the sex they are. Just like the UK Supreme Court's recent decision that in law biological sex trumps an imaginary 'gender identity', this is a big win for sanity, physical reality and common sense. The ACLU argued that because puberty blockers are occasionally prescribed to arrest precocious puberty, banning their use to make sexual fancy dress more convincing in future amounts to discrimination. The logic is skewed. The world is full of things that are good for one purpose and bad for another. Nothing against picking crops, but if I used a combine harvester to vacuum your sitting-room carpet, I'd expect you to sue. There's a night-and-day medical difference between a double mastectomy to cure breast cancer and the linguistically sanitised 'top surgery' that lops healthy breasts off bamboozled girls who will never breastfeed their children in the unlikely event they can still reproduce. From the start, this whole trans business has been sold as a civil rights issue. But there is no movement in the West to deny transgender people equal access to housing or employment, much less to 'kill trans people', as Strangio asserts. There are no water fountains or lunch counters from which trans people are banished. This is a medical issue – specifically, a mental health issue – slyly packaged as a campaign against bigotry. We don't let children get tattoos, because they're too young to understand the concept of permanence and they could come to regret covering their limbs in dinosaurs. It's therefore just sensible safeguarding for the state to keep kids from opting to take powerful drugs that prevent their bodies from maturing or from opting to get their genitals carved up just because some poor excuses for grown-ups planted this fanciful notion that one can play swapsies with biological sex. This movement's 'trans rights' decode as the rights to: compel other people to mouth lies that contradict what they see with their own eyes; impose the widespread adoption of dehumanising language such as 'menstruators' and 'birthing people'; force the well-adjusted to finance costly elective plastic surgery through taxation and insurance premiums; walk around women's changing rooms with one's wang hanging out; turn women's sports into a farce; and most importantly, it seems, coax children and mixed-up teenagers to make drastic, irreversible medical decisions which may well result in infection, reduced bone density, lifelong reliance on pharmaceuticals, poor ability to form relationships, sexual dysfunction, impotence and infertility. Perhaps also in searing regret – especially once this sick societal obsession finally subsides and its victims no longer constitute sacralised members of the avant-garde but the awkward residue of an old mistake. We're making progress, but this festishistic ideology is perniciously entrenched. Children are still butchered in American blue states. Let's relieve insurance companies and the NHS of the obligation to provide gender-denying care. It's past time we restored the conviction you're really the opposite sex to being a mental illness, and one not necessarily that is best treated by humouring the delusion. Sure, men can wear dresses and women tuxes, but doctors who mangle fully functional body parts violate the Hippocratic oath. Aren't we all to some degree 'born in the wrong body'? I'm an abysmal 5ft 2in, yet I identify as 6ft 7in. I also identify as 23, so that I expect you all to ignore my skin's telltale crenulation and to ask eagerly whether I'm planning to attend graduate school. I identify as beautiful, so watch the mouth. I identify as immortal, too, so that on my deathbed I am sure to identify like fury as an alive person, and if anyone makes a move to call an undertaker I will see them in court. Apologies to the jury in advance, for the smell is apt to be unpleasant.
Spectator
19 minutes ago
- Spectator
We should welcome regime change in Iran
On the first night of what Donald Trump has called the '12-day war' between Israel and Iran, someone spray-painted a message in Farsi on a wall in Tehran: 'Thank you, Israel. Hit the regime hard – and leave the rest to us.' That graffiti encapsulated the feelings of many millions of Iranians. If you doubt this, you can read (in translation from Farsi) opposition accounts such as ManotoOfficial and IranIntlTV on Instagram or Telegram, which in the past two weeks have been posting countless messages and comments in support of Israel. These accounts are widely seen by people inside Iran, who use VPNs to get around the regime's online censorship systems. Or you can look at footage from the demonstrations in London and across the world in recent days where Iranians in exile have waved Israeli flags alongside pre-revolutionary Iranian flags, and chanted their support for Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. By contrast, as one Iranian woman put it to me: 'At the pro-Iranian government rally in London last weekend, not a single Iranian joined these left-wing British demonstrators.' What you should not do, however, is give much credence to the Islamic regime apologists wheeled out by the BBC and other British media. These are the same kind of 'experts' who were until recently invited on to news programmes and panel discussions to argue that Syrians wanted to see Bashar al-Assad remain in power. The kind who in an earlier era downplayed the crimes of the Soviet Union. The vast majority of Iranians are eager for a change of government. Such a change will almost certainly lead to a marked reduction in radical Shiism and in turn to a reduction in the radical Sunnism which grew as a counter-reaction to the 1979 Iranian revolution and has given rise to groups such as al-Qaeda and Isis. Indeed, the fall of the Iranian regime may speed up the decline of Islamism worldwide. The Iranian regime has already been greatly weakened by a series of counter-revolutionary protests, from the 2009 Green Movement to the more recent 'Women, Life, Freedom' uprising. And now, with millions of Iranians quietly and not so quietly celebrating the Israeli attacks on regime henchmen and on its hated Basij militia, which enforces internal security, the pressure for regime change may come from inside. And we should welcome it, not fear it. No one is talking about US or Israeli troops invading or occupying Iran. But we shouldn't try to thwart change and prop up the regime, as Barack Obama was accused of doing during the pro-democracy protests in 2009. Whether the regime falls remains to be seen. But for now, the campaign against Iran has been a triumph for Trump and even more so for Netanyahu. The campaign against Iran's nuclear weapons programme and the missile systems developed to deliver nuclear warheads has been compared with Israel's victory in the 1967 war when this tiny, outnumbered and outgunned democracy overcame three invading Arab armies in just six days. Three days after the 7 October massacre, an official I spoke to said that Netanyahu made a strategic decision to go methodically piece by piece against each component of the Iranian axis: Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, the Assad regime and finally Iran and its nuclear programme and its tens of thousands of ballistic missiles. Incredibly, there are still regime propagandists in the West who peddle the lie that Iran's nuclear programme is for the development of energy, not weapons. Does anyone seriously think that the Iranian regime – whose stated goal is to commit genocide against Israel and others – has spent tens of billions of dollars building one of the world's most heavily fortified sites buried deep under a mountain, in which far more uranium has already been enriched than could possibly be needed for civil purposes, for any other reason than to build nuclear weapons? Does anyone seriously believe that the regime in Tehran, which has been known to beat women to death for not wearing a hijab and hang gay men from cranes, would give up its decades-long quest for nuclear weapons merely because the likes of David Lammy or Emmanuel Macron ask it nicely to do so? Israelis certainly do not. Nor do Arabs. Had the international community allowed Iran's regime to acquire nuclear weapons, it would have sparked a nuclear arms race. Several Arab states, as well as Turkey, have made it clear that they would be left with little choice but to pursue nuclear weapons programmes of their own. They don't worry that Israel will use nuclear weapons, except as a very last resort. They do, however, fear Iran. Some European countries whose people have lived under tyrannies not so dissimilar from Iran's are under no illusions either. They immediately declared their full support for Israel's campaign against Iran's nukes. The Czech government and opposition both did so, as did Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz. As did Ukraine, where they know what it is like to be on the receiving end of Iranian drones. By contrast, the British and French governments have shown the world just how insipid they have become, issuing vapid platitudes and calling for a premature ceasefire that would have left Iran's nuclear programme largely intact. In case it hasn't sunk in, Britain is also a target of the mullahs. Crowds bussed into Tehran from the countryside each week (many paid by the regime) are instructed to chant not just 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel' but also 'Death to Britain'. Too often, what starts with Israel soon affects the rest of us: airline hijacking, suicide bombs and more. We should not rule out the possibility of Iranian missile attacks on western cities if the country's military capabilities are not kept in check. What kind of message does Britain's feeble response send to the world, including Islamists already operating within our borders? That Britain has neither the will nor the ability to defend itself. Likewise, desperate calls by British politicians for a premature ceasefire in Gaza, which would have left a still-armed Hamas in power to fight another day, would have all but removed the possibility of long-term peace between Palestinians and Israelis. Instead, an agreement to end the war in which Hamas agrees to disarm, and a peaceful Palestinian government can run Gaza, will be much easier to achieve now that Hamas's Iranian backers have been so severely weakened. Other European governments – notably Spain, Ireland and Belgium – have been even more outspoken in denouncing Israel, in effect backing the Iranian regime. There are disturbing echoes of Ireland's leaders sending their condolences to the Nazis after Hitler shot himself in 1945. We also have the usual voices in the West arguing that the strikes were ultimately futile because the Iranian regime will simply rebuild its nuclear programme so it can wreak fiery vengeance upon its enemies. Similar arguments were made in 1981 after Israel bombed Saddam Hussein's nuclear programme in Iraq, and in 2007 after Israel bombed Bashar al-Assad's nuclear programme in Syria. Neither Saddam nor Assad managed to rebuild. Another nonsensical argument being advanced after Tuesday's ceasefire is that a wounded and vengeful Iran may seek to destabilise the region. Who do these pundits think has already been destabilising the region all these years? Who destabilised Lebanon through the Hezbollah militia, which is effectively a subsidiary of Iran's Revolutionary Guard? Which country has destabilised Yemen, leading to millions of deaths through war and famine? Who destabilised Syria by bringing in thousands of heavily armed Shia militia to provide the core of Assad's army, driving millions of Syria's majority Sunni population into exile across Europe? And who gave arms and training to Hamas to carry out the biggest massacre against Jews since the Holocaust? In all cases, Iran. We should be thankful to Trump (who defied his critics in America on both left and right) and Netanyahu for holding back this expansionist Iranian regime. Arab leaders are. Hamas and Hezbollah have been cut down to size by Israel. Now there is at least the prospect for a better situation in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and elsewhere. President Obama was awarded the 2009 Nobel peace prize in his very first year in office, yet in his two terms he achieved precisely zero peace deals. In 2016 alone, Obama dropped 26,172 bombs on seven different countries, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. Yet he is still spoken of in the loftiest tones by the liberal establishment on both sides of the Atlantic as a great peacemaker. Trump and Netanyahu, by contrast, are regularly condemned as war criminals and threatened with all kinds of legal action. Yet they have signed four peace deals as part of the Abraham Accords, which, thanks in part to their actions against Iran, may now expand to include Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab world. They have demonstrated a simple lesson, one that Britain should have learnt from Churchill: a genuine peace sometimes requires the West's enemies to be defeated, not accommodated.
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
BREAKING NEWS Trump calls for Israel to 'cancel' corruption trial against 'great hero' Netanyahu after two leaders 'went through hell together'
Donald Trump sent out a strong call for Israel to cancel its corruption case against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after the president said they 'went through HELL together.' Netanyahu is the first Israeli prime minister will take the stand as a criminal defendant, over charges of accepting tens of thousands of dollars' worth of cigars and champagne from a billionaire Hollywood producer in exchange for assisting him with personal and business interests. Trump wrote a lengthy post to Truth Social defending Netanyahu in the wake of one of Israel's 'greatest moments in history.' ' BREAKING NEWS …I was shocked to hear that the State of Israel, which has just had one of its Greatest Moments in History, and is strongly led by Bibi Netanyahu, is continuing its ridiculous Witch Hunt against their Great War Time Prime Minister!' 'Bibi and I just went through HELL together, fighting a very tough and brilliant longtime enemy of Israel, Iran, and Bibi could not have been better, sharper, or stronger in his LOVE for the incredible Holy Land.' He then lengthily described how he and Netanyahu worked together over the Israel-Iran war in recent weeks. 'Despite all of this, I just learned that Bibi has been summoned to Court on Monday for the continuation of this long running, (He has been going through this 'Horror Show' since May of 2020 – Unheard of! This is the first time a sitting Israeli Prime Minister has ever been on trial.), politically motivated case, 'concerning cigars, a Bugs Bunny doll, and numerous other unfair charges' in order to do him great harm.' Trump repeated a familiar refrain from his own experiences with the law, calling the Netanyahu case a witch hunt. 'Such a WITCH HUNT, for a man who has given so much, is unthinkable to me. He deserves much better than this, and so does the State of Israel. Bibi Netanyahu's trial should be CANCELLED, IMMEDIATELY, or a Pardon given to a Great Hero, who has done so much for the State.' 'Perhaps there is no one that I know who could have worked in better harmony with the President of the United States, ME, than Bibi Netanyahu. It was the United States of America that saved Israel, and now it is going to be the United States of America that saves Bibi Netanyahu. THIS TRAVESTY OF 'JUSTICE' CAN NOT BE ALLOWED!'
