> U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, a Trump appointee, said the child — identified in court papers by the initials “V.M.L.” — appeared to have been released in Honduras earlier Friday, along with her Honduran-born mother and sister, who had been detained by immigration officials earlier in the week.
> The judge on Friday scheduled a hearing for May 16, which he said was “in the interest of dispelling our strong suspicion that the Government just deported a U.S. citizen with no meaningful process.”
My translation: "Jenny Carolina Lopez: I'm taking my daughter V.M.L. (unredacted) with me to Honduras."
The judge received a petition from non-family that said a US citizen was being deported. He inquired, and found out that it was the mother's choice, not ICE's.
"On April 25, 2025, Judge Doughty issued a memorandum order addressing the emergency petition. 2025 WL 1202548. The order acknowledged the serious due process concerns raised by the petition and scheduled a hearing for May 16, 2025, to determine whether the government had unlawfully deported a U.S. citizen without providing a meaningful opportunity to challenge her removal. Despite the scheduled hearing, on May 8, 2025, the parties filed a joint stipulation of dismissal, and the case was closed without a ruling on the merits."
"Some time that night, an officer who was supervising Julia and her daughters at the
hotel instructed Julia to write down on a piece of paper that her U.S. citizen daughter Jade will
travel to Honduras with her. When Julia objected, the officer threatened Julia that Jade would be
immediately sent to a foster home in the United States if Julia did not write a note stating that Jade
would be deported to Honduras with her. Under duress, Julia did as instructed and wrote down in
Spanish: “I will bring my daughter [Jade] with me to Honduras.”"
> He inquired, and found out that it was the mother's choice, not ICE's.
That's directly contradicted by your link; "the case was closed without a ruling on the merits".
> does the difficulty in surfacing a case
I have no difficulty at all finding this case; I replied to your comment about five minutes after you posted it.
> A Trump-appointed Federal judge clearly did not find that excuse compelling.
A Trump-appointed judge set a hearing about a situation where he was told a US citizen was being deported. I would expect any judge to care about that, regardless of who appointed them. Because we don't actually deport US citizens, it turns out.
> The same org claimed Alex Pretti was an assassin who was attempting to massacre ICE, remember. They lie; that's a matter of public record.
They didn't allege in that document that it was coerced. They allege that they didn't give them enough options to contact family etc. She had an option to leave the child in the US.
> "the officer threatened Julia that Jade would be immediately sent to a foster home in the United States if Julia did not write a note stating that Jade would be deported to Honduras with her."
This shows that the child going to Honduras was a choice by the mother. Under duress? Sure, she's getting deported. Tough choice. But she made it, not the government.
> That's directly contradicted by your link; "the case was closed without a ruling on the merits".
No it's not. What, you think the judge never saw the piece of paper? You think active cases are closed without involving the judge?
> I have no difficulty at all finding this case; I replied to your comment about five minutes after you posted it.
Sure, but it didn't fit the criteria. This US citizen wasn't deported by the government. Their mother was, and she chose to take the child with her.
> A Trump-appointed judge set a hearing about a situation where he was told a US citizen was being deported.
He's quoted as having a "strong suspicion" that a US citizen was deported.
> The same org that is claiming what?
DHS claims it was a voluntary deportation. But DHS also claimed Alex Pretti was an assassin. They're simply not credible.
> They didn't allege in that document that it was coerced.
I directly quoted it. Here it is again:
"When Julia objected, the officer threatened Julia that Jade would be immediately sent to a foster home in the United States if Julia did not write a note stating that Jade would be deported to Honduras with her."
> You think active cases are closed without involving the judge?
Again, "the case was closed without a ruling on the merits".
> Sure, but it didn't fit the criteria.
Given the above, and your other comments on incidents even Trump, Miller, and Noem are walking back their statements on, I'm not certain you're really reading anything.
> "When Julia objected, the officer threatened Julia that Jade would be immediately sent to a foster home in the United States if Julia did not write a note stating that Jade would be deported to Honduras with her."
The officer "threatened Julia" that the US citizen would stay in the US and not go with her during her deportation.
"Threatened" is a word written by her attorney. I would have said "explained."
Yes, those were her two options. Leave the US citizen in the US, or don't leave it. She made a choice. We didn't deport the kid.
I'm glad you showed how you're here to defend the fascism, which includes the fascism of claiming borders. This is why I said do your own research....no need to give more energy to questions asked in bad faith.
I did my own research, while you still won't provide a name that's supposedly so easy to find. Not one case where we actually deported a citizen, with 1.2 million forced removals.
Normalizing state-sanctioned extra-judicial murder along with a message of compliance? Maybe go find videos of where compliance got people killed because the fact is the slave catchers enjoy brutality and murder.
No, that's the thing. We accepted for a long time. Literally not one thing about any of this is new, except the politicians and reporters decided we need to focus on Minneapolis this month.
The same thing has been going on the same way for decades.
Because DHS thinks it's agents are special and need protection from doxing that politicians, judges, police, FBI agents don't have? Maybe ICE doesn't like receiving free pizzas and threatening phone calls? Maybe they were inspired by Hamas so they could go around being violent with little repercussions?
Rights don't actually exist. That's a made-up idea to avoid the very real concept of human needs and putting liberation into that context.
The issue is you can't easily justify oppressing people if you have a finite checklist of needs. You clearly can if you use a nebulous debatable term like "rights".
"They have no choice" because they're "just doing their job" and "following the law."
Which are both choices. Microsoft can for sure choose to block the government and so can individual workers. Let's not continue the fascism-enabling narratives of "no choice."
Loving this prime example of why I say we need to identify the genuine systems-theoretic needs of humans and our natural environments. And mathematically/experimentally define & verify them. Optimizing for anything outside of what's literally needed seems to be fundamental to oppression, intended or not.
"The important part is figuring out what you should be optimizing for in the first place.
Most of the time, we don’t even ask that question. We just optimize for whatever’s easy to measure and hope it works out.
Americans are largely cowards. You can see this as we're still mostly afraid of accurately defining and educating about genocide and how we all contribute to it by going to work every day, as well as afraid of feelings that arise around it.
I hope to one day contribute to a geoglyph of asphalt from torn up roads, if that's what's regenerative for the land I'm with/on/of/from/being and what the stewards of the land we gave back identify as needed. Would contribute to a geoglyph of anything else, too.
I want to build community through making visible-from-space-sized art projects with those from all around. And then go back to the plague pod I live in that's large enough to meet everyone's needs while keeping population density low enough to get rid of the plagues or make them a much smaller threat.
The governments established by the wealthy to protect the wealthy while maintaining the oppression that allows for their class to exist still will not end the oppression they implement out of necessity for them to exist.
Electoral/constitutional politics isn't going to protect us. "International law" isn't real and neither are other laws. It's time to update threat models to include this fact. The threat-actors are definitely aware of it and using it to their advantage while relying on us to keep thinking on terms of the contrived systems they maintain.
Any analysis of corporations without contextualizing them within systems generating/maintaining genocides is going to be too reductive to be about the real world, like most economic models. The result will always be too idealistic & artificially limiting the scope of potentially meaningful work (as well as the creativity needed to move past such limits).
Passively contributing to genocide is still contributing to genocide. Complicity/apathy toward genocide is still contributing to genocide.
We need only look at the cultures of the Aka, Bayaka, and Mbuti tribes, who all split off from the same tribe 150k years ago & still share many of the same cultural norms oriented around counterdominance, matrifocal care, and singing as a means of protection & decision-making.
Their cultures can show us what it took to survive and thrive in a jungle with numerous large predators. These tribes carry wisdom we can apply in our daily lives.
reply