An April 30th New York Times article, “Behind Trump’s Deal to Deport Venezuelans to El Salvador’s Most Feared Prison,” reads like material that’ll be entered into the record at future trials of Trump administration officials. It reveals President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador pressed for the U.S. to only send convicted criminals, and sought assurances the deportees really were members of Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan gang the U.S. claimed conducted an incursion at the behest of the Venezuelan government (a claim contradicted by U.S. intelligence agencies). Many of the Venezuelans, in fact, hadn’t been tried, and connections to the gang were based on dubious assessments of tattoos and clothing. In this, Bukele, self-described “world’s coolest dictator,” had more concern for legality than the Trump administration, but accepted the deportees (except for eight women on the deportation flights to an all-male prison).
Bukele gave a list of high-ranking members of the Salvadoran gang MS-13 that he wanted sent back to El Salvador. “That stoked alarm among some U.S. law enforcement officials,” the Times reports. “The Justice Department has spent years building cases against MS-13 leaders for criminal activities in the United States, alleging that the gang has been protected by the Salvadoran government.” One wonders whether Bukele wanted them back so he could kill or disappear them, or because they’re collaborators he intends to continue protecting. In any case, they’ll face no justice in U.S. courts.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio is looking for additional “foreign partners” with which the U.S. can make similar arrangements. “I intend to continue to try and identify other countries willing to accept and jail as many gang members as we can send them,” Rubio said. All this is in keeping with advice the article states Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, has given fellow Trump officials, summarized as: “Be bold. Do not worry about potential litigation, especially when drafting Mr. Trump’s immigration actions.”
The article detailed the case of Neri José Alvarado, onetime college student from Yaracuy, Venezuela, who crossed illegally into the U.S. in April 2024, hoping to find work to pay for his autistic younger brother’s medical care. Alvarado got a job at a Dallas bakery and filed an asylum application to the U.S. government, saying he feared returning to Venezuela because he’d participated in anti-government protest there. “I am afraid of being in a country where constitutional guarantees are not respected,” he wrote, not recognizing he’d come to one. Alvarado was quizzed in detention about an autism-related tattoo on his leg. Enrique Hernández, the bakery owner who’d employed him, has considered going to El Salvador to vouch for his employee, who’d been sending regular payments for his brother’s care.
Also on April 30th, the Times reported that the Trump administration recently inquired with El Salvador about releasing Kilmar Abrego García, the Salvadoran man who was deported from Maryland to El Salvador in a violation of a court order initially acknowledged by the administration as an error. According to that article, Bukele’s government said no, on grounds Abrego García’s a Salvadoran citizen. However, this revelation came shortly after Trump, in an interview, asserted that he has the power to retrieve Abrego García, but was choosing not to because the man (he falsely claimed) has “MS-13” tattooed on his knuckles. Trump also said it was up to Justice Department lawyers, not him, whether the deportee should be returned. The first statement placed Trump in evident violation of a Supreme Court order to “facilitate” a reversal of that deportation; and the second was strange in light of Trump’s disdain elsewhere for any degree of Justice Department independence.
Contrary to expectations that deporting “criminal migrants” would be an “80–20 issue,” polling shows growing alarm about such policies. A CNN poll taken April 17–24 showed 52 percent saying the administration’s gone “too far” in deporting illegal immigrants, the same percentage said it hadn’t made the country safer, and 57 percent said the government’s effort hasn’t been “careful.” On a question describing the Abrego García case, 56 percent said the U.S. should try to bring him back, 20 percent that it shouldn’t, and 23 percent hadn’t heard enough to say. Nonetheless, Democratic political leaders are divided on such questions as whether legislators traveling to El Salvador is a worthwhile activity.
Even if it weren’t a politically beneficial focus, fighting against the destruction of due process and the violation of court orders is a moral and constitutional imperative. Fortunately, it also has political potential. The Trump administration’s engaged in massive power grabs, but with recklessness and ineptitude that generates attention and criticism. Plus, there are fissures within the government. The Times’ “Behind Trump’s Deal” article said it was pieced together “from internal government documents, court filings and interviews with 22 people familiar with the operation or legal challenges, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation.” Insiders are leaking, because they foresee a political and legal reckoning.
—Kenneth Silber is author of In DeWitt’s Footsteps: Seeing History on the Erie Canal. Follow him on Bluesky