A federal judge has temporarily stayed her order that required the Trump administration to provide information regarding efforts to retrieve Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a man mistakenly deported to El Salvador.
This seven-day pause was issued by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, following an agreement from Abrego Garcia’s lawyers.
This development marks a significant moment in an ongoing legal battle that has extended to the Supreme Court and prompted Judge Xinis to accuse the administration’s lawyers of acting in “bad faith.”
On Wednesday evening, Drew Ensign, a deputy assistant attorney general, submitted a sealed motion to pause the judge’s directive requiring the government to provide documents and testimony about its plans to retrieve Abrego Garcia.
Additionally, the administration sought relief from the obligation of submitting daily updates on their progress.
While Judge Xinis has not elaborated on her rationale for the stay, she maintained the requirement for the daily status updates.
Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador last month, a move described by official sources as an “administrative error”. However, the administration claimed that he was connected to the MS-13 gang.
This order came just one day after Judge Xinis criticized the administration’s lawyers for ignoring her orders and impeding the legal process.
Xinis expressed her frustration in a written filing, accusing the lawyers of acting with “bad faith” by withholding information.
The Trump administration has asserted that much of the information regarding Abrego Garcia’s case is protected by state secrets laws, attorney-client privilege, and general government privileges.
Yet, Judge Xinis has dismissed these claims and demanded detailed justifications for each assertion of privilege by 6 p.m. on Wednesday.
Tom Homan, the border czar under the Trump administration, did not directly respond to the judge’s comments when questioned by reporters at the White House.
Nevertheless, he reiterated the administration’s position that Abrego Garcia would be detained and deported again if returned to the U.S.
In a notable turn of events, the U.S. Supreme Court mandated the Trump administration nearly two weeks ago to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States, rejecting the administration’s claim that it could not retrieve him after his erroneous deportation.
Trump administration officials have contended that the responsibility lies with El Salvador for his return, although the president of El Salvador has indicated he lacks the authority to effectuate that return.
Moreover, the administration continues to argue that any actions taken to retrieve Abrego Garcia are shrouded in secrecy laws.
Judge Xinis criticized the administration, stating that their vague and unsubstantiated claims of privilege have been used to obstruct discovery and evade compliance with court orders.
In her remarks, she emphasized that the defendants had known for at least a week that they were required to provide specifics to support any claim of privilege but continued to rely on general assertions.
Abrego Garcia, aged 29, lived in the United States for approximately 14 years, contributing to society through his work in construction, raising a family, and becoming a fundamental part of his community.
Court records suggest he was previously shielded from deportation by a U.S. immigration judge in 2019, as there were credible fears of persecution due to gang violence in El Salvador.
In 2019, the court found that returning him could lead to potential harm from local gangs.
Despite having a federal work permit, the Trump administration nonetheless deported Abrego Garcia, contradicting prior protections.
His legal team has pointed out that he has never been charged with a crime and denied the allegations of gang membership.
Furthermore, they emphasized that the informant’s claims regarding his supposed MS-13 affiliation were baseless, as he had never lived where the informant alleged.
The tumultuous nature of this case is not new for the Trump administration, facing harsh scrutiny from federal judges regarding its handling of deportation cases.
Last week, a three-judge panel from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals expressed disbelief at the administration’s claim of being powerless to assist Abrego Garcia’s return.
That ruling came just a day after another federal judge in Washington, D.C., found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in contempt for violating court orders related to deportee flights to El Salvador, indicating the ongoing tension over immigration enforcement practices.
Critics, including Democrats and various legal scholars, have suggested that the Trump administration is igniting a constitutional crisis by disregarding judicial rulings, while the White House insists that the judiciary itself is culpable in this conflict.
The legal wrangling surrounding Abrego Garcia’s case serves as a poignant reminder of the complexities and often contentious nature of immigration policy and enforcement in the U.S. government.
image source from：https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/federal-judge-halts-order-details-efforts-abrego-garcia-return-us/3898764/
