U.S. Will Try to Deport Abrego Garcia Before He Faces Trial, Justice Dept. Says
That plan, laid out by a Justice Department lawyer at a hearing in Federal District Court in Maryland, directly contradicted a statement by the White House last month describing the possibility that the administration might re-deport Mr. Abrego Garcia as 'fake news.'
At the hearing, Judge Paula Xinis, who is overseeing the original civil case emerging from the wrongful deportation, expressed frustration at the government's shifting views of how it planned to handle Mr. Abrego Garcia. The statements in court by the Justice Department lawyer, Jonathan Guynn, further muddied an already unclear picture of Mr. Abrego Garcia's future after the administration abruptly returned him to the United States last month to face criminal charges.
At one point, Judge Xinis compared getting certain answers out of the government to 'nailing Jell-O to a wall.' At another point, she described the 'complete chaos' that had arisen from Mr. Abrego Garcia being 'caught' between his civil case in Maryland and his criminal case in Federal District Court in Nashville.
Mr. Abrego Garcia is in custody in Nashville, where he has been indicted on charges of taking part in a yearslong conspiracy to smuggle undocumented immigrants across the United States. Even though a federal magistrate judge has said he can go free because he was not a flight risk or a danger to the community, his lawyers asked that he remain locked up for the moment, fearing that the administration might seek to deport him again.
There has been persistent confusion about what might happen to Mr. Abrego Garcia almost from the moment he was brought back from his erroneous expulsion to El Salvador.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
41 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Iranian mother released from ICE detention after Republican House Majority Leader intervenes
NEW ORLEANS — An Iranian mother detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers has been released this week following advocacy from Republican House Majority Leader Steve Scalise. Mandonna 'Donna' Kashanian, 64, was detained by ICE officers last month as she gardened in the yard of her New Orleans home. She had been living in the United States for 47 years and her husband and daughter are both U.S. citizens.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Frustrated Judge Struggles In The Quicksand Of The Abrego Garcia Case
GREENBELT, MARYLAND—I suppose it was inevitable that in a case over whether the Trump administration can defy federal court orders without consequence, a trial judge would emerge as a main character. In the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of Maryland is all of us: baffled, frustrated, annoyed, and at times outraged by the Trump administration's conduct. It has flouted her orders, given her the run-around on facts, advanced contradictory legal arguments, and stonewalled discovery. The lingering image across multiple hearings in her courtroom is Xinis hunched over the bench, head in hands, imploring DOJ lawyers to provide her with straight answers to her questions. In another hearing Monday that stretched for more than two hours, Xinis waded through the latest round of Kafkaesque circularity from the Trump administration as it urged her to dismiss the original Abrego Garcia case now that he is back in the United States, albeit to face trumped-up federal charges in Tennessee. In the end, after very little progress was made, Xinis scheduled another hearing for Thursday, when she wants the Trump administration to put on the witness stand a yet-to-be-determined official who can give first-hand testimony as to the plans for deporting Abrego Garcia to a third country if he is released from custody in his criminal case. It's seems almost inevitable that no new government witness will provide any clearer answers than have been given so far in a case that Xinis described today from the bench as 'like trying to nail Jello to the wall.' Before we descend into the miasma of Monday's hearing, a reminder that the historic implications of this case don't concern the fate of Abrego Garcia himself, Trump administration deportation policies, or the practice of rendition to CECOT in El Salvador. The core of the case is whether the executive branch can defy the judicial branch with impunity, upsetting the Constitution's carefully calibrated balance of power. The top-line news from the hearing today, for those deep in the procedural weeds of the case, was that Xinis denied two different government motions to dismiss Abrego Garcia's case. The first motion to dismiss advanced three different bases for dismissal, and she rejected all three of them without even hearing arguments from Abrego Garcia's lawyers: 'I don't need to hear from plaintiff on this motion. This is an easy one.' The government's second motion to dismiss argued that the case is now moot because the Trump administration had satisfied Xinis' preliminary injunction by returning Abrego Garcia to the United States. Xinis, not convinced that the government had yet complied in full, denied that motion, too. For his part, Abrego Garcia's lawyers were asking Xinis to order Abrego Garcia returned to Maryland if and when he is released from custody in the criminal case the Trump administration drummed up against him in Tennessee. Xinis didn't rule on that motion and likely won't until she hears the testimony slated for Thursday. While that is the top-line news, it hardly does justice to the absurdity of some of the Trump administration's arguments. Continuing the cavalcade of DOJ lawyers involved in the case, the bulk of the argument for the Trump administration was carried on Monday by Bridget K. O'Hickey, who until May was working in the Florida Attorney General's Office. Swapping out DOJ attorneys in the most controversial cases has been a common practice in Trump II, a clear effort to avoid accountability for prior misrepresentations, missteps, and assurances. O'Hickey wasn't even at the Justice Department for the first several weeks of the Abrego Garcia case — a point Xinis made openly. O'Hickey struggled in court to recite the factual and legal history of the case, a deficiency called out by an incredulous Xinis. 'This is your argument!' Xinis exclaimed at one tense moment as O'Hickey stumbled to make the government's case. 'You are taking up my time with this argument.' On several occasions, questions from Xinis were followed by painfully long silences while O'Hickey conferred at the counsel table with Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Guynn, who joined DOJ in April. After O'Hickey said the Trump administration has no intention of repeating its error and removing Abrego Garcia to El Salvador again, Xinis interjected that the government has not acknowledged it was an error: 'For three months, your clients told the world they weren't going to do anything to bring him back. … Am I really supposed to ignore all that?' In a subsequent exchange, Xinis came close to losing her cool when O'Hickey said the administration has acknowledged the removal was an administrative error. Xinis pointedly traced the arc of DOJ attorneys first telling her that it was an error (that attorney, Erez Reuveni, was subsequently fired from the Justice Department), then telling her that it wasn't and now, on Monday, telling her that it was after all. Xinis poked and prodded throughout the hearing. She called out the Trump DOJ for telling her for months that it didn't have the power to produce Abrego Garcia because he was in the custody of El Salvador, then proceeding to produce him to face criminal indictment in Tennessee. She demanded to know when the DOJ lawyers in the civil case knew about the machinations of the criminal case. She pressed DOJ lawyers about whether the indictment of Abrego Garcia played a role in his return to the United States. The answers from the DOJ attorneys were mostly non-responsive. Once she dispensed with the government's motions to dismiss, Xinis turned to the issue of what happens to Abrego Garcia if he is released from custody while the criminal case is pending. While a magistrate in Tennessee was prepared to release Abrego Garcia under strict conditions, his lawyers last week took the highly unusual step of asking her to pause his release for fear the government would immediately detain and deport him. In Monday's hearing, DOJ's Guynn confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security plans to detain Abrego Garcia if he is released and deport him to an unnamed third country. But Guynn left open the possibility that the government might instead challenge the original immigration judge order that bars Abrego Garcia's removal to El Salvador, the order the government violated on March 15 when it shipped him to CECOT. Abrego Garcia's attorneys want him returned to Maryland and given notice and hearing before he is deported to a third country. The Trump administration is taking the position that Xinis can't order Abrego Garcia's return to Maryland because he was no longer in Maryland when the case before her was filed. A stunned Xinis called that position 'remarkable' since Abrego Garcia was unlawfully removed and at the time the lawsuit was filed he was 'in CECOT at your hand.' For her part, Xinis was adamant about getting information from the Trump administration about the specifics of its plans for deporting Abrego Garcia to a third country. 'Given the history of this case and a series of unlawful actions, I believes it's in my authority to at least get the information,' Xinis said. Today's proceedings come against the backdrop of months of stonewalling from the Trump administration that Xinis is still considering treating as contempt of court. Also pending is a motion from Abrego Garcia to sanction the government for discovery violations. But as with so many Trump-era confrontations, the brazenness of the defiance isn't matched by a proportional or speedy response. I don't mean to paint Xinis as helpless or hapless. She is a longtime litigator who spent most of her legal career as a federal public defender before President Obama appointed her to the bench in 2016. With nearly a decade as a judge, Xinis is no noob. But by the luck of the draw, Xinis wound up among the first wave of judges to confront the compromised DOJ of the Trump II presidency. Things are not how they used to be. Correction: The original version of this article incorrectly suggested that Pam Bondi was still Florida attorney general when President Trump appointed her as U.S. attorney general. Bondi's term as Florida AG ended in 2019.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Congress Throws More Money at Removing Immigrants than Most Countries Spend on Their Armies
It's hard to convey just how big the new budget makes the country's immigration enforcement infrastructure. The Bureau of Prisons? Bigger than that. The FBI? Bigger. The Marine Corps? Bigger even than that, by some estimates. All in all, the bill directs around $170 billion through 2029 to various forms of immigration enforcement, according to an analysis by the American Immigration Council and TPM's own read of the legislation. ICE, responsible for enforcement, detentions, and removals, will oversee much of the spending. The picture is not so much of an expanded immigration enforcement system, but of an entirely new one. 'It's going to get really scary,' Adriel Orozco, senior policy counsel for the American Immigration Council, told TPM. 'I do think that we are in a place where the Trump administration is centering a lot of the law enforcement authority of the federal government into the Department of Homeland Security.' Take this example of how the legislation ranks which parts of the immigration system are important. The bill gives ICE $29.8 billion to hire new staff and conduct deportations. That will lead to a hiring spurt of deportation officers; an additional $4.1 billion bump goes to Customs and Border Protection for new personnel. For immigration detention, also overseen by ICE, the bill allocates a whopping $45 billion. If that's not enough, there's more: Remember the wall? It was Trump's big immigration-related promise during the 2016 campaign. It didn't get built during his first term (and Mexico never paid for it, as Trump promised). Congress allocated $46.5 billion for its construction in this legislation. (A Senate source tells TPM that this, too, was drafted in such a way as to be fungible, so it could be used for building detention facilities as well.) It's a headspinning increase from ICE's 2024 funding, that, per a recent CRS report, stood at $9.9 billion. At the same time, the bill adds only a modest number of immigration judges, capping the number at 800 starting in November 2028 — an increase from the current approximately 700. Tom Homan, Trump's border czar, cast the funding surge last week in the administration's favored light: a means of evicting criminal aliens from the country. The operation that the numbers envision goes far beyond that; Homan complained that, at current funding levels, the country only has between five and six thousand deportation officers. 'More agents means more bad guys arrested, taken off the streets of this country every single day,' he said of the new funding. 'Every day we arrest a public safety threat or national security threat, that makes this country much safer. Who the hell would be against that?' To Homan, the Trump administration, and its allies in the right-wing media, every undocumented immigrant apprehended and removed is a criminal alien. It's how they cast the Alien Enemies Act removals, even though a 60 Minutes analysis found that around three-quarters of those removed had no documented criminal background. The point is mostly to justify the massive scale of the resources now being marshaled to detain and eject immigrants. This is all new money to be added on top of that which Congress has already marked for immigration enforcement. Under this legislation, ICE will receive a budget for detention alone that's more than two-thirds larger than that of the federal prison system. The bill also makes a $10 billion slush fund available to the Secretary of Homeland Security, currently Kristi Noem, for reimbursing 'costs incurred in undertaking activities in support of the Department of Homeland Security's mission to safeguard the borders of the United States.' Absent the constant claim, expressed by Homan and others, that undocumented immigrants present a criminal threat beyond the administrative violation of crossing the border, there's little argument for this level of spending. Orozco, the Immigration Council attorney, said that more than half of those currently in immigration detention had no criminal record. 'It's a lie that they're trying to use these resources just for folks with, with serious criminal histories,' he said. For the past five months, immigration enforcement has been the focus of the Trump administration's most egregious abuses of civil liberties. Removing people to El Salvador's CECOT without a hearing; using the military to intimidate anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles. It's the tipping point of the spear for much of the current administration's authoritarian impulses. Because of this, that's about to get a lot bigger.
