The “Water Cooler” is a feature on Claycord.com where we ask you a question or provide a topic, and you talk about it.
Today’s question:
QUESTION: Do you think U.S. Deportees, including those with a violent past or gang affiliation, should be housed in El Salvador’s prisons, or do you think we should keep them in the United States?
Talk about it.
Yes
If there is no threat of substantial incarceration,
there is no deterrence to criminal behavior !
.
El Salvador now has highest incarceration rate in the world.
As a result, it now has a lower homicide rate than America.
.
Those predacious upon society have zero empathy
for their victims and should be removed from society.
.
El Salvador has a proven method for dealing with gangs
and vicious criminals.
.
Sending illegals with violent past or gang affiliation to El Salvador
has a two fold benefit, gets them out of our country and
sends a clear message, STAY OUT OF AMERICA.
El Salvador is in America!!
Maybe you want a geography refresher?
El Salvador is in the Americas, specifically Central America. However, that’s not quite the same thing as being in America.
Yes…it is less expensive for us as taxpayers and the CECOT (maximum security prison) has helped the country go from the most violent to one of the safest thanks to Bukele’s government policies.
https://elsalvadorinfo.net/homicide-rate-in-el-salvador/
El Salvador is not doing it for free. We just haven’t seen the bill yet.
not simply deportees, they should be launched back over the border any way possible and refused entry for 10 years because they knew better. Now for the total s#!theads YES! (bangers,murder,mayhem,etc…), throw them in the darkest hellhole you can find and let them rot.
Neither. Unless they are granted for asylum, They should be deported to theirs countries of origin and let the governments decide.
If they’re from El Salvador yes. Otherwise send them to their native countries of course.
Best idea…except some countries won’t take their own criminals back… …🤔 Maybe we could just strap them to a parachute…and… you know….!
If they are known criminals, and/or gang members, and if they have been declared
terrorists, they should be sent to El Salvador, and forget the due process. If it has been
proven that they are not criminals or affiliated with any gang, then send them back to their home country. The question is, are illegal invaders guaranteed the right to due process
under the US Constitution? The terrorists of 9/11 were sent to Gitmo without any due
process, and nobody said a word. The Dems want to argue that illegals have the same constitutional rights as American citizens, or of legal permanent residents. They do not.
For instance, it is illegal for an illegal invader to own or possess a firearm because they are
not protected by the Second Amendment. Therefore, why should they be protected by the
Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments?
I hope no one ever ‘declares’ you a terrorist or gang-member , ‘cos you won’t be able to defend yourself under this rule.
The constitution makes a very clear distinction between citizens and persons, the 4th and 14th amendments apply to ‘persons’, ie everyone within the jurisdiction, ie not just citizens.
Fair point about Gitmo, but plenty of people said words, and it’s a mess we still haven’t unravelled, Bush sent most of them back though.
Regarding the second amendment, the Supreme Court agrees with you, but largely due to the historical context of when it was drafted.
Get real that didn’t happen in Trump’s first term & it’s not happening now! Go out & get some fresh air!
You are quite a legal scholar Dawg, but unfortunately wrong. You might look at the following case rgarding the Gitmo detainees.
.
Rasul v. Bush (2004): Detainees had the right to challenge their detention through habeas corpus in U.S. federal courts, affirming some access to judicial review.
.
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004): U.S. citizen detainees (like Yaser Hamdi) were entitled to due process, including the ability to contest their detention before a neutral decision-maker.
.
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006): Military commissions set up to try detainees violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Conventions, requiring fairer procedures.
.
Boumediene v. Bush (2008): Detainees were granted constitutional habeas corpus rights, allowing them to challenge the legality of their detention in federal courts, regardless of their citizenship or location at Guantanamo.
Habeas Corpus can be suspended by the President in cases of invasion. MS-13 and Tren de Aragua are legally considered foreign terrorists.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 which states:
.
The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
.
Article I relates to the Legislative Branch, not the Executive Branch
So the President can’t suspend habeas corpus? Someone should have told Lincoln that. Someone should have told W Bush that too.
President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus rights during the Civil War. In 1861, he authorized the military to detain individuals suspected of disloyalty without trial, particularly in border states and areas under Union control but sympathetic to the Confederacy. This was done to maintain order and prevent rebellion, as Lincoln believed the emergency of the war justified it. The suspension was controversial, leading to legal challenges like Ex parte Merryman, where Chief Justice Roger Taney ruled it unconstitutional, arguing only Congress could suspend habeas corpus. Lincoln ignored the ruling, citing national security.
Congress later passed the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act in 1863, retroactively authorizing Lincoln’s actions. The suspension applied primarily to Confederate sympathizers, draft dodgers, and those accused of aiding the rebellion, with estimates of 13,000–38,000 detentions. It was lifted in stages as the war ended, fully restored by 1866.
.
And with respect to GW Bush you can read the various ruling I had posted earlier.
Are you trying to say there is no public threat? Stop simping for criminals bad look…
Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) acknowledged that detainees alleged to be members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan criminal organization, have the right to a habeas corpus hearing to contest their designation as gang members before deportation under the Alien Enemies Act. This admission was made during a court hearing on March 21, 2025, before U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. DOJ lawyers, including Deputy Assistant Attorney General Drew Ensign, confirmed that individuals could challenge their detention and alleged gang affiliation through habeas petitions, as noted in discussions about the availability of judicial review for individualized determinations.
https://www.ushistory.org/documents/amendments.htm
illegal can’t legally own a gun because they can’t complete paperwork. How are they going to pass a background check if they aren’t in the system.
noun ( like accused, person, people, persons) is the reason illegals get some rights from the constitution for they are people. For example , Look at the 4th and 5th amendment, respectively, they start with “the right of the people …” and “ no person…” and make no mention whether the person is citizens, legal residents, and illegals.
Lol, I came here for the comments, they were as I expected.
if you believe in the constitution, then the answer is ‘not without due process’, the Supreme Court agrees … if you think what they say is important.
Former Gambian soldier convicted on torture charges in unprecedented US trial, following ICE investigation
.
Guatemalan alien illegally residing in the United States and convicted of sexual battery indicted for fraudulently obtaining custody of an unaccompanied alien child in the United States
.
ICE removes twice deported criminal alien wanted for human trafficking in El Salvador
.
ICE arrests Honduran alien convicted of sex offense
.
ICE, federal partners arrest illegal Honduran national charged with incest, sex crimes in Virginia
.
ICE arrests over 1K illegal workers, proposes $1M in fines
.
ICE removes Salvadoran national wanted for rape against a minor in his home country
.
ICE removes Guatemalan national wanted for gender crimes in his home country
.
https://www.ice.gov/newsroom
And yet Andrew Tate and Conor McGregor were welcomed with open arms….. And you posted nothing
But now you have so brave so stunning
So you must be a big fan of the decision in Citizens United v. FEC – if you think what SCOTUS says is important. You know, free speech and all. Then there’s Dobbs…
No US citizens. We got plenty of prisons.
Along the New Mexico border (probably part of the mountain “public” trail…but I don’t know for sure) the Fed just made a 60 foot wide swath of land running along the NM / Mex border … a FORMAL annex of Fort Huachuca, NM … so the army can patrol without question… step on that trail…your butt belongs to the US Army for trespassing on Military land. Love it!
Through Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) the US military can incarcerate any one – any where!
…So, Now, we just need to Formalize El Salvador prisons? Maybe?
No! El Salvador’s President should first focus on improving the economy, healthcare, education, infrastructure issues of his country rather than be involved with what other countries are or not doing.
Once that President leaves his post, the country is going to be as bad, if not worse, than it was before he took office and illegal immigration from that country is going to once again surge.
That mega prison has now 3 different gangs, which could unify and become a mega gang. Once Trump and El Salvador’s President leave office, what are the guarantees that El Salvador will not release US prisoner’s into their streets, which in turn will give the prisoners the freedom to return to our country. Sending US criminals to that country is a short-sighted solution to a bigger problem.
One of the issues that need fixing is countries not allowing their citizens to be deported back to their native countries.
Every single illegal immigrant being deported, whether they are gang affiliated or not, must be returned to their native countries, which could equal not having to pay $6M to El Salvador.
He has that covered but why are you worried about El Salvador & not America?
It is against our Constitution to arrest, detain any citizen in our country without due process and send them to a foreign prison regardless if the are undocumented or not. El Salvador is also violating International Laws by accepting these prisoners from the US that did not receive due process. It has never been legally proven that any of these men were part of a gang. Some were picked up by ICE merely because they had tattoos. If we continue to support and condone this kind of illegal behavior in our nation, then none of us are safe any longer and could possible be picked up off the street, regardless of legal citizenship. All of the 3 Palestinians that were picked up by ICE were green card holders, did not commit any crimes or violence. All 3 still remain in custody. This violation of our 14th Amendment in regards to these cases can not be supported by the 1798 War Powers Act because we are not at war.
I never got past your first sentence because it was easy to determine you are clueless. You referred to citizens, then used the phrase “undocumented or not”. Citizens and legal residents are documented, genius.
Rollo,
Perhaps you may want to consider reading about your Pope that just passed, and how he supported migrants, those in need, regardless of their legal status in any country. There is a girl in Russia right now, named Darya Kostreva, who at 19 is sitting in a Russian penal colony for 3 years merely for writing a poem opposing Putin’s war. If that is the America, you choose to live in, so be it. I choose only Freedom for All.
You mean the Pope that opened the borders to Vatican City? That Pope?
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
First of all, not my pope. That’s very presumptive of you, genius. Secondly, I still haven’t read past the first sentence of your comment since you chose to respond to my factual statement regarding citizens and legal residents with a straw man argument. A very poorly constructed one at that.
If you in the United States of America illegally, then I really do not care where you are detained as long as it is not in the United States of America. Get them out.
If you are here legally, sure stay in a USA prison. If you are not a citizen (but legally here) and you are convicted of a major crime (rape, murder, gangs etc ..), revoke your green card or whatever else you were given and get kicked out of the USA without a chance to come back.
If you are a naturalized citizen, do your time in a USA prison.
Yes, they should. Any Mexican that steps foot in there is good as dead. So, I think they should send all drug dealers and other violent POS to rot in jail for life down there.
Who cares where they go as long as they are out