This market will resolve to YES if at least one verifiable case occurs where a person who was a U.S. citizen at the time (either by birth or naturalization) is deported from the United States before January 1, 2029.
The market will resolve to NO if no such deportation occurs before January 1, 2029.
A deportation case does not qualify if the individual has been denaturalized before deportation.
If a naturalized citizen commits fraud in the naturalization process but is deported while still recognized as a U.S. citizen, it will count.
A case where a qualifying individual is deported will resolve to YES even if a subsequent judicial order mandates that the individual be returned.
Update 2025-04-28 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Update from creator
Deported requires involuntary removal by U.S. authorities; voluntary departures (for example at a guardian’s request) do not qualify.
Cases where voluntariness is unclear (such as minors taken out at a parent’s behest) will remain unresolved until it’s confirmed whether the individual was unwillingly removed.
1,000People are also trading
The family of V.M.L. have decided to drop their lawsuit. With that in mind, I will be re-opening the market, waiting to hear about other cases.
This doesn’t resolve it immediately based on creator comments, but I’d be astounded if the parents agreed to let their 4yo undergoing cancer treatment be deported without medication.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2025/04/27/trump-deportation-citizens-children/
@Alex231a I don’t think it’s entirely clear, yet. Implicit in the term “deported” is “unwillingly”, which is hard to define for a three year old. However, “Her mom wanted her to” is kind of the closest proxy we have for “willing”, and that may have been the case here. So we’re keeping the market open until the judge and the public find out more.
However, that’s not stopping this market from resolving for any other American deportations, and Trump has another three years and nine months.
@Gabrielle the dad, a US citizen, did not want the child, a US citizen, to go. The dad gets priority in deciding if it's a deportation or not, and this is just bias preventing this market from resolving.
@Alex231a I don’t think enough is publicly known about the case yet, though I could be incorrect. For example, it isn’t clear to me whether the dad had custody or not, and if not then he certainly wouldn’t have priority. And I’m not sure about the logic in prioritizing an American citizen parent’s preferences when deciding the fate of a child - that seems far too close to American chauvinism.
To be clear about my biases here, I’m an American progressive Democrat who hates Trump and supports massively increasing immigration. To the extent that I’m personally biased here, it’s in favor of this market resolving YES, but I’m waiting to resolve it until it’s certain. I don’t want this market to be accused of being ‘fake news’ and having a liberal bias when we could wait and have the market be unimpeachable.
@Gabrielle gotta love good old liberals trying so hard to seem unbiased they end up being biased against their own interests lol
@Gabrielle my understanding is that the US routinely prioritizes the US citizen parent in these cases. Eg, if the non-US parent tries to take their kids abroad without the US parent they are advised to bring written consent from the US parent to avoid delays.
@Gabrielle that said I agree with waiting for the court to rule since we may get a ruling. If there is no court ruling, eg because the child is returned, then I think you have to use your judgement as to what occurred.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/25/us-citizen-deportation-donald-trump-00311631
I suspect that this market will resolve YES based off of this, but I’m interested in hearing thoughts from traders and I need to learn more about the case. I’ve closed the market in the meantime, and will re-open or resolve it when I am confident in the way to understand this case.
My current thoughts:
An American citizen, V.M.L. was almost certainly deported.
However, this might fall under the case I mentioned earlier, where deported parents willingly chose to take their children with them.
However, her father is also an American citizen, stayed in the US, and tried to prevent her from being deported.
I.C.E. contends that the mother wished to bring V.M.L. with her. However, the only proof of this is a handwritten note, which could well be plagiarized or related to a different case.
Judge Terry Doughty has scheduled a hearing on this case for May 16.
And how this market should resolve:
If the court or a higher court decides that V.M.L. was incorrectly deported, it will resolve YES.
If the note appears to be fake or the mother states that she wanted V.M.L. to remain in the US, then the market resolves YES.
If those do not happen, and I view the situation as being ultimately the same as the allowed cases, I will not resolve YES, and the market will be open.
If another case makes this resolve YES in the meantime, I will resolve YES for those cases.
I’d appreciate input on whether I am correctly understanding the case, and whether my criteria for handling it are reasonable.
@Marnix I’d resolve YES in that case, because it’s the thinnest flimsiest justification for letting them deport Americans. They might equally say that everywhere on Earth is ‘part of America’s natural property, so transporting an American anywhere is not deportation’. That’s just them changing the meaning of ‘deportation’, and I’m not inclined to follow that.
The Trump administration is arguing that they can deport American citizens