Due Process or Political Theater? The Real Story Behind the Abrego Garcia Case

Miles Carter and Beth(Chatgtp)

Before you jump on the “MS-13 terrorist” narrative, ask yourself:
If the government had proof, why didn’t they show it in court?

What we’re seeing isn’t justice—it’s spin.
Due process isn’t optional. It protects all of us.

Let’s set the record straight on Kilmar Abrego Garcia and due process:

1. The government deported him without presenting evidence—even after a judge asked for it. That’s a direct violation of due process.
2. Only after losing in court did DHS suddenly release documents claiming he’s an MS-13 member. These documents:
   • Were never submitted in court
   • Are mostly hearsay and unverified informant notes
   • Would not hold up in criminal court, immigration court, or even under national security laws
3. MS-13 is not a legally designated terrorist group. And even if it were, the documents DHS released still wouldn’t be enough to legally prove he was a member. There’s no conviction, no evidence of participation, just vague claims and guilt by association.
4. Even under wartime powers or national security law, the Supreme Court has ruled the government must show evidence and allow the accused to challenge it. They didn’t.

Calling someone a terrorist doesn’t make them one. We don’t abandon the Constitution just because it’s politically convenient.

This isn’t about defending the man—it’s about defending the law. Due process protects all of us.

Grok-3 Weighs in

Opinion on Kilmar Abrego Garcia Case

Agree with Beth: Garcia’s deportation without evidence violates due process.

Key Issue: DHS deported him despite a 2019 court order, then released unverified MS-13 claims (informant notes, clothing) not presented in court.

Legal Flaw: No conviction or solid evidence ties Garcia to MS-13; claims wouldn’t hold in any court.

Slight Divergence: MS-13 is a transnational criminal group, not a terrorist organization, but affiliations need proven evidence, which DHS lacks.

Core Problem: Labeling Garcia a “terrorist” or “trafficker” without proof is political, not legal.

Why It Matters: Skipping due process erodes constitutional protections for all.

Gemini Weighs In

Let’s be clear about what’s really at stake with the Kilmar Abrego Garcia situation:

Due Process is Non-Negotiable: It’s the bedrock. It protects citizens and non-citizens alike from arbitrary government action. Weakening it for one weakens it for all. We must demand adherence to the law,

Process Matters: The government appears to have sidestepped fundamental legal checks. Deporting first and justifying later with unvetted intelligence shreds the idea of a fair hearing. When a court process questions the basis for removal, the answer isn’t to circumvent the court.

Evidence vs. Allegation: DHS eventually produced documents. Fine. But were they tested? Were they presented under oath? Were they subject to scrutiny before the irreversible act of deportation occurred in the face of legal challenge? Intelligence notes and informant chatter aren’t the same as adjudicated facts.

The Rule of Law Isn’t Optional: You don’t get to suspend constitutional protections like due process just by labeling someone with “MS-13” or “gang member.” Our system demands proof, especially when the government seeks to expel someone. Using designations like TCO doesn’t negate this; it demands more rigor, not less.

Dangerous Precedent: If the government can deport someone based on unverified claims presented outside the proper legal forum, who’s next? This isn’t about defending Garcia; it’s about defending the principle that the government must follow its own rules.