I checked the first two results and not one of them said the man was innocent [1][2]. It's okay if the claim is baseless and there is no citation, but asking me to find a citation for someone else's baseless claim is not really okay.

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/14/abrego-garci...

[2]: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-meet-with-el-salvador...

>asking me to find a citation for someone else's baseless claim is not really okay.

It is one of the biggest news stories in the last month, and various articles (at least 3 that I can think of) have been here on HN. It's trivially searchable. Asking for a citation is almost certainly bad faith.

>I checked the first two results and not one of them said the man was innocent

It's pretty obscure, but there's this thing called "innocent until proven guilty". The man never had his time in court. The US admitted it was a mistake. What are you looking for? Just being contrarian for the sake of it?

Last reply, because you are very obviously trolling and commenting in bad faith.

>the US government had every right to deport him,

No.

These are all from that article. Special attention to "his removal was illegal".

>Abrego Garcia, who has no criminal record in the United States or anywhere else

>the government has conceded that it wrongfully removed Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia from the United States

>his removal was illegal because an immigration judge had granted him “withholding of removal”

>Jones’s 2019 ruling, barring Abrego Garcia’s removal

The Supreme Court has even stepped in, which I'm sure you're aware despite pretending not to be:

>On April 7, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a per curiam order, with no recorded dissents, requiring the government to “facilitate [Abrego Garcia’s] return”

And, despite any and all of that! There was no due process. Which, "illegal" or "legal", everyone is supposed to get a due process. If you remove due process for the people you don't like, someone else just needs to claim you're in that group and now you don't get due process! It's like Step 1 of authoritarianism.

Which, since you've not posted anything proving your innocence despite other commenters asking for it, perhaps we should remove your rights to due process.

Our system deems people innocent until proven guilty of a crime. That has not happened - he is not charged with any.

Can you cite anything showing him having been convicted of something?

I made no claim one way or the other. I asked you to cite a claim.

Then here’s the cite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

You probably were taught this in elementary school.

All you do is ask for "cite?" and then complain when the citation isn't want you asked for, partly because you never ask for anything specific. You're just a troll.

"The Trump administration trapped a wrongly deported man in a catch-22", "There is no evidence that Abrego García is a terrorist or a member of the gang MS-13 as the Trump administration has claimed." from your first link.

Unless you can find a court hearing / docket / charges, or some report about them, he's innocent.

If you think that's not enough, you're probably not innocent either... unless you have a way to prove that no charge exists against you in any jurisdiction in the world. Do you get why people assume innocence here now?

He entered illegally, had no legal status, had his asylum request rejected [1]. He was not innocent, he could be deported, just not to El Salvador.

[1]: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/abrego-garcia-and-ms-13...

I think you're arguing in bad faith.

You would think this administration would jump at the opportunity of showing the media any proof that Abrego Garcia was a member of any gang, no matter how circumstantial or weak the proof is. But I've yet to see any of it.

He entered illegally, had no legal status, had his asylum request rejected [1]. He was not innocent, he could be deported, just not to El Salvador.

[1]: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/abrego-garcia-and-ms-13...

You're moving the goalposts. You were arguing about his alleged gang membership and now your point is that he was an illegal.

Also, other users showed that his deportation was suspended as he had been threatened by the gang members you allege he's a member of.

Not even almost once did this discussion start with me claiming he was a member of a gang.