Everyone deserves due process. Yes, even serial killers, drug dealers, arsonists—and worst of all, according to President Trump,—immigrants.
Kilmar Ábrego García, a Maryland man with legal protections under the immigration system, was wrongfully deported to El Salvador. His case highlights the dangers of bypassing basic legal rights.
A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to facilitate Ábrego García’s return to the United States, but the government has not yet complied.
Officials have cited difficulties negotiating with El Salvador and questioned their legal obligations under the court ruling.
In June 2018, then-President Donald Trump tweeted, “We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country.
“When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came.”
The comment drew criticism from civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, which called the statement inconsistent with constitutional due process protections.
At the time, many dismissed the tweet as just another inflammatory remark, typical of Trump’s style. But that dismissal was a mistake, what once seemed like rhetoric has become policy—with real and lasting consequences.
Ábrego García’s case is not isolated. Across the United States, people—regardless of citizenship status—have found themselves caught in a system where constitutional protections are applied inconsistently or ignored altogether.
From individuals profiled like Ábrego García to U.S. citizens accused of minor offenses such as shoplifting or trespassing, due process remains a fundamental right.
The erosion of these protections reflects a troubling shift in how the country treats those it views as outsiders.
Many people argue that due process protects the guilty, but in reality, it protects everyone by preserving the rule of law.
Failing to defend due process doesn’t just harm the people directly affected—it erodes public trust in the justice system as a whole.
When basic rights are treated as optional, it sends a message that power—not principle—determines justice. That’s not just unconstitutional. It’s un-American.
Protecting due process for everyone, even those who are vilified, is not a loophole in the law. It is the purpose of the law.
Although some claim due process should not apply to everyone, others remain committed to the constitutional principles that hold our nation accountable.
“Even when under attack, our actions must always be grounded on the bedrock of the Constitution—and must always be consistent with statutes, court precedent, the rule of law, and our founding ideals,” former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in a 2012 speech at Northwestern University School of Law.
When authorities decide who gets due process and who doesn’t, it opens the door to authoritarianism—where certain groups are denied their fundamental rights based on arbitrary distinctions, an inch away from fascism.
Knowing your rights is essential. Without them, authorities can easily abuse power without accountability. When people understand their legal protections, they are better equipped to stand up for themselves and others.
Although petitions like the one calling for Kilmar Ábrego García’s return may not bring immediate results, they raise awareness, apply pressure on officials, and lay the groundwork for change.
Protecting due process for everyone, especially the unpopular, is not a flaw in the system it’s what the system is for.
