Why is Trump showing obvious contempt for courts?

There’s a famous Mae West joke that goes like this: A judge says to her, “Are you trying to show contempt for this court?” West responds, “I was doin' my best to hide it.”

Unlike the buxom comedienne, Donald Trump isn’t trying to hide his contempt for courts. He’s doing his best to show it.

Consider what happened after El Salvador’s president Nayib Bukele met with Trump last week. Asked whether he would send the mistakenly deported Abrego Garcia back to the U.S., Bukele responded, “The question is preposterous: how can I smuggle a terrorist into the United States?"

The question was reasonable. Bukele’s answer was preposterous.

First, Garcia is not a terrorist. He may (or may not) be a gang member, but even with all of the efforts by the administration and its supporters to demonize him (which are irrelevant to his current case), I haven’t seen any credible claim that Garcia is a terrorist.

More importantly, the claim that Bukele would have to smuggle Garcia into this country is laughable. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that the Trump administration must facilitate Garcia’s return. Team Trump interprets this to mean that it must allow his return.

This understanding of “facilitate” is untenable. Facilitate means to make an action easier, not just to permit it. But even under Trump’s definition, the administration would allow Garcia back. There would be no need for Bukele to smuggle him in.

Trump would have made it easier for Garcia to return if he had explained this to Bukele. Evidently, he did not. For Bukele, having just met with Trump, to make the statement he did shows that the two are playing a game.

Why? In the case of Bukele, the answer is clear. He wants to be Trump’s friend, for fun and profit. Trump doesn’t want Garcia released, so Bukele doesn’t want to release him.

But what about Trump? The administration says that even if Garcia returns, it now has solid grounds on which to deport him, and will do it. So why not put an end to this farcical legal dispute? Why not have the guy the administration mistakenly deported brought back and then try to deport him the lawful way?

In my opinion, part of the answer resides in the administration’s “never give and inch” philosophy. Part may also lie in Trump’s genuine contempt for judges who disagree with him — “the many Crooked Judges I am forced to appear before,” as he calls them.

But I think there’s more to it than that. I think Trump wants his opponents to be arguing in favor of illegal immigrants. I think he wants his immigration policies to be front and center.

What issues would be dominating the headlines if Trump had not deported Garcia and those Venezuelans? A tanking stock market. A war in Ukraine that Trump said he would bring to an end “very quickly” — in 24 hours even — but which rages on.

One issue that wouldn’t be dominating is immigration. Absent the dispute over Garcia and the Venezuelan gang member, that issue wouldn’t be much in the news. The mainstream media and Trump’s other left-liberal enemies aren’t going to talk about his immigration successes — the virtual end to illegal border crossings and the lawful deportation of large numbers of illegals.

His enemies will, though, talk about the administration’s reluctance to follow court orders. And they should. But Trump and his team probably believe they are playing into his hand by doing so because the public is with Trump on immigration and won’t regard Garcia with sympathy.

Are they right about this? Jason Willick thinks not. He writes:

The Trump administration wants a fight about Abrego García that unifies the GOP, not a fight about the rule of law that divides it. Trump might not care about any institution, but there are Republican politicians who want to preserve the legitimacy of the conservative-leaning high court.

Willick also points to a Marquette University Law School poll conducted last month in which 83 percent of the public, including 78 percent of Republicans, said Trump needs to respect Supreme Court rulings.

Willick may be right. However, we shouldn’t underestimate Trump’s ability to read public sentiment. Nor should we underestimate his ability to squeeze political capital from a fight with lower courts over immigration and then stop just short of violating unequivocal Supreme Court rulings.

Stopping just short of such violations may be the best we can hope for from this administration.