US Rep. Maxine Dexter on traveling to El Salvador to push for return of Maryland resident

Democratic Oregon U.S. Rep. Maxine Dexter traveled to El Salvador, along with three other Democratic Congressional representatives, to push for the release of Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

The Maryland resident was sent to El Salvador last month without a court hearing and despite a 2019 order from an immigration judge that barred his deportation. The Trump administration has accused Abrego Garcia of being a member of the El Salvadoran gang MS-13 and engaging in human trafficking.

Last week, Democratic U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland traveled to El Salvador, where he was eventually able to meet with Abrego Garcia.

Rep. Dexter joins us to explain why she also decided to make a trip there, which she argues is less about Abrego Garcia’s case and more fundamentally about the constitutional right to due process. The U.S. Supreme Court has ordered the Trump administration to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return from detention, which it has refused to do.

Note: The following transcript was transcribed digitally and validated for accuracy, readability and formatting by an OPB volunteer.

Dave Miller: This is Think Out Loud on OPB. I’m Dave Miller. Oregon Democratic Rep. Maxine Dexter was in El Salvador yesterday. She went with three other Democratic members of Congress as a way to keep attention on Kilmar Abrego Garcia; the Maryland resident was sent to El Salvador last month without a court hearing and despite a 2019 order from an immigration judge that barred his deportation. Rep. Dexter has been clear that this is not simply about Abrego Garcia’s particular case, but more fundamentally about the constitutional right to due process.

I talked to Dexter yesterday when she was in the capital, San Salvador. I started by asking her simply what she hoped to accomplish by going on the trip.

Rep. Maxine Dexter: My intention is to make clear that I will fight for the rule of law against the Trump administration’s refusal to abide by a 9-0 Supreme Court ruling to effectuate and facilitate the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia, so that he could have his due process. It is unacceptable to me as a representative of over 780,000 people who are concerned for their constitutional rights to stand silent. So I’m here to elevate this issue, to keep it in the public eye, and to make sure it is clear that this is a bright red line that has been crossed and we cannot accept it for Mr. Abrego Garcia or anyone else. It isn’t about him as much, although I want him home, I want him to know that he’s safe. But this is absolutely a precedent that might be set if we allow this to come to pass … and to refute the premise that this is acceptable.

Miller: On that note of this is not exactly or only about him, I do want to point out that if you turn on conservative radio right now or go to conservative news sites, the message you’ll get is that Abrego Garcia has a history of domestic violence and has been accused by the administration of being a member of MS-13. Basically they say “good riddance” to him as somebody who was living in the U.S., and if Democrats want to make him a martyr, go right at it. You’re welcome to. This is bad politics. I’ve heard that pretty explicitly on a conservative radio recently. What’s your response?

Dexter: My response is that is a distraction from what this administration is doing, which is tearing apart the Constitution and refusing to comply with a United States Supreme Court ruling. It is without question that our Supreme Court has told him to take action to bring Mr. Abrego Garcia home. His innocence or his background, though I have every reason to believe that it’s been misconstrued and misinformed in the public’s eye, it is not about that. This is about the rule of law, about the Constitution that my job is to uphold and to see for.

So the Trump administration and those on the right wing media side who are saying all kinds of nasty things about us, this is what we all should be doing. Mr. Abrego Garcia’s nightmare, the nightmare his family is enduring, could be anyone’s nightmare if we let this come to pass, and that is the red line that we are here to fight against. We cannot let one person’s history get in the way of the real question here, which is whether or not the rule of law is being upheld – and it is clear to me that it is not.

Miller: Did you have a specific ask of the Salvadoran government?

Dexter: We requested prior to coming to meet with Mr. Abrego Garcia. That request went through the United States Embassy, making sure that we followed all appropriate diplomatic channels. We were told this morning that that request had been denied. We continue to make requests through the embassy and the State Department. We are absolutely not here to engage directly with the El Salvadoran government. It is with our administration in the United States that we have a challenge and that is why we are here, to keep this in the public eye, to make sure we do not accept that this is at all legal or precedent that we are willing to embrace as a United States community.

Dave, my district has reached out on this issue more than any other for the last two weeks. It is my job to represent the will of my constituents and the will of my constituents to show up, be courageous and be their advocate. That’s why I’m there.

Miller: I’m interested in that because a few days ago, California Governor Gavin Newsom called the case of Abrego Garcia the distraction of the day. He said, “this is the debate they want,” meaning the debate that Republicans want. If I understand what he’s saying correctly, it’s that, in polling, for example, Americans seem much more likely to support the administration’s handling of the southern border or deportations than, say, the economy. One of your fellow Democrats is saying that we’re playing into their hands and we are choosing to follow the “distraction of the day,” in his words. You’re saying you’re hearing more about this from your constituents than about any other issue. What would you say to the governor of California?

Dexter: My understanding is that the governor has wanted to qualify his statement. That is not for me to make any impression or refuting, I wasn’t there. I don’t understand the context that that statement was made in, but I will absolutely stand by the Constitution and my obligation to uphold the Constitution any day of the week. If that’s a distraction, then I think my colleagues need to rethink what the oath is that they took to uphold and protect the Constitution of this country.

Miller: The Supreme Court – as you noted, but I want to come back to this – they’ve ordered that the administration “facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return.” What does that language mean to you?

Dexter: I think that what it means is at least there is some action being taken, and after a briefing at the embassy today, it is clear to me that no meaningful action has been taken to facilitate his transport back to the United States. So it certainly is the case that we have not acted upon the command of the United States Supreme Court and the lower court to bring him home. After a briefing at the embassy, I left that briefing with no reason to believe that we have taken any action to facilitate his release.

Miller: As you know, the White House is paying the Salvadoran government millions of dollars now to house people who’ve been deported from the U.S. The administration says that they cannot force the Salvadoran government to release these prisoners. Meanwhile, the Salvadoran president has said that releasing Abrego Garcia would be preposterous. As you noted, so far there’s been no real action besides, in some cases, frustrated words on the part of federal judges. What options does the judicial branch have?

Dexter: Dave, let me just take a step back and say this whole argument is ideological and absurd. We are in a contract, is my understanding; we have requested as congressional members to see this contract, but we are under contract with another government to hold prisoners. Those prisoners were qualified, my understanding is by President Bukele, to be criminals. He was willing to take criminals, so that is the precedent. I have not seen the contracts, but my understanding is we are paying for criminals to be jailed here in another country.

My first challenge is if these are not criminals, then we should have the ability with that contract to ask for those noncriminals to be returned home for due process. Whatever the finger pointing is, it is clear that we have the ability as the United States of America, the most powerful government in the land, to negotiate with another country the return of a citizen if that is what we want. It is clear there is not the will there and that is what I am advocating for.

It is very convenient, I would say, for us to be able to say “sorry, we can’t do anything about it.” These people are here because we took action. We need to take action to bring them home.

Miller: Just so I understand your language earlier … when you were talking about a citizen, you mean, given that he is a Salvadoran citizen.

Dexter: He is a Salvadoran citizen, but has been given the permission to remain in the United States because his safety was feared for if he was to return until the conditions changed in El Salvador – and that has not happened. So he was returned to El Salvador after he was requesting to stay in the United States out of fear. He is not a United States citizen, but you don’t have to be a citizen to have access to due process and not by our Constitution.

Miller: What would you have wanted to talk to him about if you had been given the ability to?

Dexter: The first thing is the family is very concerned about his health and welfare. I spoke with his family earlier today and he has several medical as well as mental health conditions that they are concerned about. They have had no verification of his being alive, his whereabouts. They don’t know where he’s [inaudible]. They certainly don’t know if he has access to the diet and the medications that he would need and to stay healthy. So as a physician, I absolutely am concerned about his wellness.

I also am concerned that if we had had time to speak with him, we could have further insight into the conditions in the facility where he is and to find out if other individuals are incarcerated there. The fact of the matter is, he’s supposed to have his life, his wellness and access to counsel. These are international humanitarian laws that are not being followed. His counsel has not been given access, and that is true for Andry Romero and other Venezuelans individuals who have been taken; they have no connection or contact with their families or their council, which is in and of itself, by my understanding, an infraction of international humanitarian law.

Miller: Before I say goodbye, I just want to go back to the big picture here in terms of the branches of government. As we were talking about before, to a great extent, this is a tension now between the executive branch and the judicial branch. Here you are, along with three of your congressional colleagues as members of the legislative branch, to keep a spotlight on this issue. What role do you see for members of Congress here, besides using whatever version of a bully pulpit that you have?

Dexter: That is our obligation. I believe that the rule of law should be first and foremost a priority for any elected individual. This is about due process. If we take it away from one man, regardless of their citizenship, it can be taken from anyone. We make the laws. We do not enforce them. We do not decide, as a court would, whether or not they’re being followed appropriately or if they are constitutional. But all three branches have checks and balances by design, so that no branch has disproportionate power.

What is happening is the Trump administration is taking disproportionate power and it will not be on my watch that I allow it to happen without fighting it every step of the way. And I hope that my colleagues from across Congress, across the United States will also show up and maintain a spotlight on this, because it is a very clear red line, in my mind. It’s a constitutional challenge being made by our executive branch, and it is our duty to continue to escalate and elevate this issue until it is resolved in the courts to the satisfaction of our citizens in the country.

Miller: Maxine Dexter, thanks very much.

Dexter: Thank you, Dave. I appreciate your time.

Miller: Democrat Maxine Dexter represents Oregon’s 3rd Congressional District. We talked yesterday when she was still in El Salvador.

“Think Out Loud®” broadcasts live at noon every day and rebroadcasts at 8 p.m.

Contact “Think Out Loud®”

If you’d like to comment on any of the topics in this show or suggest a topic of your own, please get in touch with us on Facebook, send an email to thinkoutloud@opb.org, or you can leave a voicemail for us at 503-293-1983. The call-in phone number during the noon hour is 888-665-5865.