During the military coup in Argentina in the 1970s, the government routinely imprisoned and sometimes executed individuals without as much as charging them with a crime, let alone giving them due process. Many people reacted to such atrocities by blindly trusting the authoritarians in power and saying: “If the government did this, that person probably deserves it…”.
It’s hard to think of a more twisted reaction to such a clear violation of individual rights. It rings profoundly un-American to us in the U.S.
Yet that’s what many people are arguing when it comes to the case of Kilmar Abrego García, the man wrongfully transferred to a Salvadoran prison and now the protagonist of an unprecedented saga with the federal government, as explained recently in these pages. Some are sure the government must’ve had a reason. They think that due process doesn’t apply to him, and that it doesn’t matter that he never got his day in court.
They are wrong. That Abrego García wasn’t given due process should matter not only to him, but to every American: due process is how the government proves to “We the People” that it’s exercising its delegated powers correctly.
Abrego García became the face of the government’s flouting of due process, but he’s not its only victim. Many of the other 250 individuals sent to El Salvador to be imprisoned in a maximum-security confinement center for four months were also accused of being gang members, but the government never presented clear evidence. About 75% had no criminal record, and many had no known immigration violations or had pending lawful status claims, per the Cato Institute.
Take the case of Andry Hernández, a Venezuelan makeup artist with a pending asylum claim who was persecuted in his home country for his sexual orientation and political views. He entered the U.S. lawfully. We’ve seen no proof of his alleged gang ties. We only know that he had tattoos of a crown (which read below them “mamá” and “papá”) that the government alleges show his affiliation with the Tren de Aragua gang. No other evidence was presented.
Jerce Reyes Barrios suffered a similar fate. He was accused of being a gang member due to his tattoos, according to his lawyer’s affidavit. One tattoo read “Dios” (God) and another one was the logo of the soccer club Real Madrid. He allegedly did “gang signs” on his social media. No other evidence is publicly available.
To be clear, these were not extraditions (requiring charges and judicial involvement) nor deportations (legally “removals;” a civil administrative process). What happened here was a transfer from U.S. custody to Salvadoran custody for incarceration (without any U.S. criminal adjudication) rather than a civil removal where the person is released.
Abrego García, Hernández, and Reyes Barrios were not deported—they were sent out to be imprisoned without trial, without a meaningful chance to defend themselves, and with not so much as a shred of publicly presented evidence, whether in a court of law or otherwise, of their alleged gang affiliation.
If that fact alone doesn’t outrage you, consider what this disregard of constitutional rights means for you.
Due process is what stands between individuals and tyranny. Without due process of law, we’re all a bureaucrat’s whim or an executive order away from being stripped of our freedom. When the government is allowed to accuse people of gang ties and to imprison them like they did Abrego García and the others, with no chance to defend themselves, how are you to prove that you’re innocent and, importantly, an American citizen?
(This isn’t hypothetical: U.S. citizens have already been imprisoned, sometimes for days, without due process, as I discussed recently.)
Most Americans won’t have to defend themselves against crime accusations from the federal government, but that doesn’t make due process any less important. When due process is respected, the government is made to present the evidence for depriving someone of their freedom. It’s made to build a case and present it before a judge. This is how the government shows, not just to the defendant, but to every American citizen, that it’s following the law, that it cares about and respects our Constitution, and that it’s therefore exercising its delegated powers correctly.
Abrego García might actually be a brutal criminal, in which case he doesn’t belong in America and deserves deportation. But his criminality wouldn’t change the fact that he deserves, and we all deserve that he gets, due process. If he is a vicious criminal, we should say to the government: prove it. Show us that you investigated properly, that you came up with the evidence, and that you have a case against this man. Show us what he did. Show us that you care about justice and doing right by the alleged victims. Show us that our tax dollars and, importantly, your delegated powers are properly at work.
Those who side with the government in denying due process to Abrego García and others sent to El Salvador because they were “illegals” (which many of them weren’t) should rethink their stance. They are enabling the government to act unchecked and to deny to them the accountability they are owed. They are acting against their own self-interest.
Americans shouldn’t turn a blind eye to the flouting of due process. Our elected officials should stand for the Constitution and the Founding Principles of this country. We should demand better of our government.
Agustina Vergara Cid is a columnist for the Southern California News Group and Young Voices contributor. Follow her on X @agustinavcid