Due process is paramount

People in the Trump administration seem to want to compare the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case to that of the man who brutally raped and murdered Rachel Morin because they both entered our country illegally. Let’s do so.

Abrego Garcia, never convicted or even charged with a crime, was deported to a prison in El Salvador because of what the administration conceded was an error, before alleging that their acknowledgment of this error was itself an error — sort of. I don’t know whether Abrego Garcia was a member of the criminal gang MS-13, but clearly the administration does not know either (“Allegations link Abrego Garcia to MS-13: Here’s what we know,” April 18). That is why the U.S. Constitution provides for due process, a hearing during which each side presents evidence and a neutral judge makes the determination.

The man who murdered Rachel Morin was convicted by a jury that deliberated for 46 minutes. As one who has tried a dozen murder trials, I can tell you that it takes the jury about that long to get seated in the jury room and begin to begin to discuss the case. In the Morin case, the positive DNA links from clothing, the repeated false statements by the defendant and other evidence made a finding of guilt clear and obvious and the verdict quick and certain.

But at least as far as I know, no one suggested that this undocumented individual who clearly had committed an unbelievably horrific crime should have been sent to prison without a trial, without due process.

A criminal case is different than a deportation hearing and the process due in deportation hearings is less than at criminal trials. At a deportation hearing, the government has a lower burden of proof and the defendant does not have the right to a jury trial, for example.

But the individual involved does have the right to a hearing and that is the right, based on the cherished tradition of American due process, that is crucial in our form of government, no matter what you think of Abrego Garcia or the undocumented.

— Steven P. Grossman, Pikesville

Van Hollen a master at media spin

With more and more negative reports coming to light on the so-called unlawfully deported “Maryland father of the year,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen has proven himself to be a master of media manipulation. By not even acknowledging documented background information accumulated on Kilmar Abrego Garcia since his illegal entry into this country from El Salvador, the senator seems to be getting himself into a deeper hole, which makes one wonder what his real motive is.

It seems it is more of a convenient political opportunity to broaden the Democrats’ resistance to the current administration as it clamps down on illegal immigration and associated criminal activity that had grown under the Biden administration. It further seems that Abrego Garcia slipped through the cracks in illegal immigration proceedings over the years he had been in this country, and Van Hollen is hell-bent on widening them even further.

— Michael Ernest, Catonsville

Chuck Grassley showed courage

I have gained, grudgingly I admit, some newfound respect for Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa. The senator has continued his usual tour of the state, meeting in person with his constituents, many of whom are incensed by President Donald Trump’s policies on immigration, higher prices, inflation, Social Security, among others.

It took considerable bravery on the senator’s part to meet face-to-face with angry, shouting constituents. That bravery is in sharp contrast to the actions of my representative, Andy Harris. Harris avoided any unpleasantness by holding his town hall by telephone, where he was in absolute control of the Q&A.

Harris could use a bit of Sen. Grassley’s courage!

— Jim Dempsey, Edgewood