"Let Us See Them Enforce It": The Abrego Garcia Case and the Collapse of Constitutional Order

Welcome to the Edge of the American Experiment

If you've been feeling like something's not quite right, like the ground beneath our democracy has subtly, suddenly shifted, you’re not alone. The case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father wrongly deported to a notorious torture prison in El Salvador, might seem like just another headline in a news cycle filled with outrage. But look closer, and you’ll see it: this case is the stress test for American constitutional order.

For the first time in living memory, a president, not just any president, but a former and potentially future occupant of the Oval Office, is directly defying a federal court ruling upheld by the Supreme Court. And the ramifications go far beyond one man’s unlawful deportation. This is a deliberate power play, one that places the Executive Branch in open defiance of the Judiciary, shaking the very pillars of checks and balances.

Let’s walk through this moment, carefully, critically, and together. Because what’s happening now won’t just determine the fate of Abrego Garcia. It will decide whether our courts still mean anything at all.

1. The Rule of Law Meets the Rule of One Man

The judiciary’s role in American governance is deceptively simple: interpret the Constitution and ensure the law applies equally. But what happens when the president simply ignores a court’s ruling?

On April 4, Judge Paula Xinis ordered that Abrego Garcia, who was deported after what the government admitted was an illegal administrative error—be returned. The Fourth Circuit upheld the ruling. Then the Supreme Court refused to block it, stating the administration must “facilitate” his return, while leaving wiggle room around the word “effectuate.”

And that’s where the crisis cracked open. The Trump administration seized on that semantic distinction, deciding that facilitating didn’t require them to do anything. Instead, they said: we’ll wait until El Salvador voluntarily releases him. A decision that, effectively, nullifies the court’s ruling.

As former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal put it:

“If the president can ignore a direct court order, even one upheld by the Supreme Court, then we no longer have a government of laws. We have a government of men. Or rather, of one man.”

It’s a terrifying prospect. If one branch of government can violate the rulings of another with no enforcement mechanism, then the system of checks and balances collapses. It's not theoretical anymore. It’s happening.

2. The Mega-Prison as Political Tool: Exporting Punishment to CECOT

To understand why the Trump administration is so adamant about not bringing Abrego Garcia back, you have to understand where they sent him.

CECOT, El Salvador’s mega-prison, is not just a detention center. It’s a state-run black site masquerading as a penal institution. Constructed by Nayib Bukele’s authoritarian regime, it holds up to 40,000 people, many without charges or trials, under conditions that international human rights groups call “torturous.”

Prisoners are stripped naked, beaten, deprived of sunlight, and held indefinitely. There’s no contact with family or legal counsel, and mass graves reportedly dot the grounds.

This is where the U.S. government sent a man with no criminal record, no trial, and no due process.

As Sarah Yager of Human Rights Watch noted:

“CECOT is not a prison in any recognizable democratic sense. It is a tool of fear. For Trump to use it as an offshore holding facility signals a deep authoritarian drift.”

Why use CECOT? Because it creates a legal black hole, outside U.S. jurisdiction, beyond judicial oversight, and functionally impervious to scrutiny.

Which leads to the real nightmare: Trump’s remark during an Oval Office meeting that “homegrowns are next.” Meaning: U.S. citizens could be shipped to foreign prisons, bypassing due process entirely. Think that’s hyperbole? He said it on camera, with senior officials like JD Vance, Marco Rubio, and Pam Bondi nodding along.

---

3. “Let Us See Them Enforce It”: The Precedent of Presidential Defiance

The phrase echoes in historical chambers. Andrew Jackson, when confronted with a Supreme Court decision he disliked, is reported to have said:

“John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.”

Jackson went on to drive the Trail of Tears.

Now, Donald Trump seems to be following suit. In defying the Court’s ruling, Trump is asserting a dangerous precedent: that presidents don’t have to follow court orders if they disagree with them.

The current impasse mirrors a growing divide in American governance. The executive has all the force—control of law enforcement, the military, immigration agents, and even nuclear codes. The judiciary, by contrast, has only words.

And as legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw observed recently:

“The Constitution assumes good faith. It assumes all actors are playing by the same rules. But when one actor rejects the legitimacy of the game itself, the system has no built-in remedy.”

This is what we're seeing. A stress fracture in the very bones of our republic.

Where do you stand? Should any branch of government be immune to oversight? Should a president be allowed to ignore the courts when it's inconvenient?

---

4. The Heritage Playbook and the Long March to This Moment

None of this is accidental. The seeds of this crisis were planted decades ago.

The Heritage Foundation, once a think tank with mainstream conservative leanings, has evolved into the strategic brain trust of the Trumpist movement. Its “Project 2025” blueprint lays out an explicit plan to gut civil service protections, centralize presidential power, and neuter regulatory and judicial constraints.

This isn’t conjecture, it’s a written document.

As one insider told The Atlantic,

“They’ve spent billions and decades preparing for this. They don’t want power to govern—they want power to dismantle. This is the finish line for them.”

That’s why the Abrego Garcia case is more than a legal battle. It’s a test case—a way to see if the courts can be steamrolled. If successful, it opens the door to a far more ambitious authoritarian project.

And make no mistake: Abrego Garcia was chosen precisely because he seemed disposable. An immigrant. A father. A man who wouldn’t make the front pages.

But here we are.

---

5. The Coming Showdown: Contempt, Discovery, and an Uncertain Future

On April 15th, Judge Xinis escalated the situation. She ordered expedited discovery, a legal blitz to uncover the full scope of the Trump administration’s actions. She authorized depositions of DHS, ICE, and State Department officials. She opened the door to a contempt finding, potentially triggering a constitutional crisis unlike anything we’ve seen.

Her ruling was clear:

“Every day Abrego Garcia remains detained in CECOT constitutes irreparable harm. This court will not sit idly by.”

But here’s the sobering truth: if the Executive Branch refuses to comply, even with contempt rulings, the Judiciary has no enforcement arm.

And that leaves us with a question that no one wants to ask out loud:
What happens when the courts can no longer enforce the law?

Looking Ahead: Fragile Hope in the Face of Darkness

We are now navigating waters with no historical map. I don’t write that lightly. But I believe, as so many legal scholars and civil rights advocates do, that what happens in the next few weeks will define American democracy for a generation.

The machinery of democracy wasn’t built for this level of coordinated sabotage. But the spirit of it, rooted in the people’s collective demand for accountability, might still hold.

So we must ask:
Do we still believe in law as a constraint on power?
Do we still believe in a judiciary that matters?
Do we still believe in the idea that no one, not even a president, is above the law?

The answer cannot be passive. It must be deliberate, vocal, and sustained.

Because if this moment passes without consequence, we may never get another chance to reclaim the balance.

And I’ll be here, following every development, asking the hard questions, and hoping, desperately, that the system can still bend toward justice.

---

Become a paid subscriber for ongoing live sessions, analysis, updates, and deep dives. Stay informed. Stay loud. Stay engaged.