Federal Judge Orders Return of Maryland Man from El Salvador Prison
A federal judge has called the U.S. government’s actions regarding Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident, as “wholly lawless.” This statement came after Judge Paula Xinis ordered the Trump administration to facilitate his return from a notorious prison in El Salvador. Garcia’s deportation raised serious legal concerns amid allegations that he had been associated with the MS-13 gang.
Background on Garcia’s Case
Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a 29-year-old Salvadoran national, had never faced any criminal charges in the United States. He had been detained by immigration officials and was removed from the country last month. Garcia possessed a work permit issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and was actively training as a sheet metal apprentice, working toward a journeyman license. He is married to a U.S. citizen.
Judge’s Critique of Government Actions
Judge Xinis pointed out the lack of credible evidence supporting the claims that Garcia was ever affiliated with MS-13, labeling the allegations as “vague” and “uncorroborated.” Furthermore, she noted that an immigration judge previously prohibited his deportation to El Salvador due to fears of gang-related persecution.
In her opinion, the judge expressed disbelief that the government argued it could remove individuals, including U.S. citizens, to overseas prisons without legal justification. “As defendants acknowledge, they had no legal authority to arrest him, no justification to detain him, and no grounds to send him to El Salvador,” she stated.
Government Response and Legal Proceedings
The Justice Department is contesting Judge Xinis’s ruling and has requested the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to put her order on hold. The government referred to Garcia’s deportation as an “administrative error” while simultaneously suggesting he was involved with MS-13, despite a distinct lack of evidence to support this claim.
Internal Controversy within the Justice Department
Following the court proceedings, Erez Reuveni, a Justice Department attorney, was suspended for conceding in court that Garcia should not have been deported to El Salvador. His comments raised eyebrows among legal experts and officials, drawing parallels to courtroom conduct that undermines advocacy.
Attorney General Pam Bondi condemned Reuveni’s remarks, describing them as inappropriate for a Department of Justice lawyer. In contrast, former DOJ lawyer Stacey Young defended Reuveni, arguing that many attorneys are faced with a challenging choice between following directives from the administration and upholding their legal responsibilities.
Conclusion
The case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia underscores significant issues within immigration policy and the legal framework governing deportations. As the proceedings continue, implications for both Garcia and broader immigration practices remain to be seen.