Federal prosecutors in Tennessee have made a motion for a pre-trial detention hearing regarding Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was recently returned to the United States to face charges in a human smuggling case.
The request follows court documents in which prosecutors argue that the nature of the conspiracy Garcia is alleged to have participated in—including the transportation of “undocumented, unaccompanied children”—justifies such a hearing.
This motion comes after Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes indicated on Friday during Garcia’s initial court appearance that the offenses outlined in the indictment did not automatically require a detention hearing, prompting her request for further briefing.
Garcia’s return to the U.S. marks the end of a prolonged legal battle, which was characterized by the Trump administration’s claims of being unable to facilitate his return.
He had been deported to El Salvador in March, landing in the CECOT mega-prison, despite a court order from 2019 prohibiting his deportation due to fears of persecution. The administration initially characterized Garcia as a member of the criminal gang MS-13, allegations which both his wife and legal team deny.
The indictment against Garcia includes two charges that allege he was part of a conspiracy to transport undocumented migrants from Texas to various locations within the U.S. over several years. According to the indictment, he was involved in the transportation of thousands of individuals, including children, in exchange for large sums of money.
In their recent filing, prosecutors maintain that the involvement of minors in at least some of these transportation activities should warrant a detention hearing. If granted, a special agent from Homeland Security Investigations is expected to testify that Garcia and others in the conspiracy were transporting minors in a manner deemed unsafe.
The agent would present evidence that Garcia allegedly traveled with young children or family members to serve as “cover” for his illegal operations, indicating that these children were often forced to sit on the vehicle’s floorboard to allow for more paying passengers, thus increasing the conspiracy’s financial gain.
Moreover, the government asserts that Garcia poses a “serious risk of flight” and also presents a substantial risk of obstructing justice or intimidating witnesses against him.
The legal team representing Garcia is anticipated to respond to the government’s request for detention on Wednesday. Arguments regarding this motion are set to be presented during Garcia’s arraignment on Friday.
In another development, Garcia’s attorneys filed a motion in federal court in Maryland, stating that their case regarding his repatriation remains unresolved until the government is held accountable for what they describe as willful violations of court orders.
In April, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the Trump administration to facilitate Garcia’s return, a ruling later affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. Following Garcia’s return on Friday, the Trump administration submitted a notice declaring compliance with Judge Xinis’ order and requested the dismissal of the complaint.
However, Garcia’s lawyers argue that despite his return, the case is “not moot” as the court plays a continuing role in ensuring that his situation proceeds as if he had not been improperly sent to El Salvador.
They further describe the Trump administration’s claim of compliance as a “pure farce,” accusing it of having acted in contempt of multiple court orders and showing open defiance towards the judicial branch of the government.
The filing also argues that the administration facilitated Garcia’s return to face criminal charges in Tennessee, rather than to Maryland as ordered, indicating that the administration had capabilities it previously claimed it did not possess.
The lawyers characterized the government’s actions in coordinating Garcia’s return in time for a press conference unveiling the indictment as a contradiction of its earlier position of powerlessness to comply with the court’s directive.
A Justice Department representative directed inquiries to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s remarks during a press conference, in which he asserted that the Maryland case was now moot, citing significant differences in circumstances before and after the indictment.
Abrego Garcia’s legal team contends that they need to investigate whether government officials acted in good faith, insisting that the case remains active due to the ongoing threat of deportation.
Judge Xinis had issued an order for government officials to testify under oath as part of the expedited discovery process aiming to address Garcia’s wrongful deportation.
Regarding the criminal investigation that led to the current charges, it was initiated in April, subsequent to Garcia’s deportation. This came as federal authorities began focusing on the details surrounding a traffic stop involving him conducted by the Tennessee Highway Patrol in 2022, during which multiple passengers were in the vehicle.
Abrego Garcia’s attorneys are poised to argue not just against the detention motion but to hold the government accountable for what they see as drastic violations of Garcia’s legal rights throughout this protracted ordeal.
Both sides are preparing for a contentious legal battle as the case unfolds in the coming days. The public interest is likely to remain high due to the gravity of the allegations surrounding human smuggling and the controversial actions of the Trump administration regarding Garcia’s deportation.
As the hearing looms, all eyes will be on the proceedings as they seek to unravel the complexities of this high-stakes legal narrative.
image source from：https://abcnews.go.com/US/abrego-garcias-lawyers-argue-maryland-case-government-held/story?id=122652258
