Advertisement Advertisement The cases have tested whether federal judges, appeals courts and the Supreme Court can prod the executive branch into doing what the law and Constitution requires.
Boasberg’s order involved Abrego García because, as part of the Venezuelan migrants’ claim, they noted that President Donald Trump told ABC News last month that he could secure the return of Abrego García if he wanted.
Last month, Xinis set deadlines for an expedited discovery plan, in which several Trump administration officials were scheduled to be deposed.
“That is why he was sent to El Salvador, and that’s why he’s being held now by El Salvador under a Salvadoran law, it’s because they believe he’s a member of the MS-13 gang,” he said.
Guynn told Xinis that the Salvadoran government had the day before said Abrego García was in good health.
The Trump administration was given a week to explain its plans to repatriate Kilmar Abrego García and 137 Venezuelan men who were deported to a prison in El Salvador under the wartime Alien Enemies Act by a federal judge in Washington on Friday. A. A block on some migrant deportations under that law was upheld by the Supreme Court.
Separately on Friday, a federal judge in Maryland who is presiding over the case of Abrego García expressed doubt about assertions made by attorneys for the Trump administration that it has made a sincere effort to comply with orders from three courts, including the Supreme Court, in order to secure the release of the Maryland resident who was wrongfully deported.
The Trump administration’s willingness to circumvent due process protections and other legal restrictions on its authority to deport individuals from the country has been made prominent by the cases of Abrego García, a Salvadoran, and the Venezuelan migrants sent to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.
Whether federal judges, appeals courts, and the Supreme Court can force the executive branch to comply with the law and the Constitution has been put to the test in these cases.
Remain in the second term of Trump.
A judge ordered the flights to turn around or remain on the ground in the United States, but on March 15, 23 Salvadorans, including Abrego García, were forced onto three planes and sent to El Salvador along with 238 Venezuelans.
That judge on Friday, U. S. . District Judge James E. In D.C, Boasberg. ordered additional information about the efforts to use the Alien Enemies Act to repatriate Abrego García and the 137 Venezuelan migrants. The data would assist in determining whether attorneys representing the migrants could bring a lawsuit in Washington to defend their right to have a judge consider their cases—a fundamental legal doctrine known as habeas corpus.
The Supreme Court decided last month that accused members of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, whom the Trump administration is attempting to deport to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act, must file habeas corpus petitions in federal courts close to their current U.S. detention facility before being removed.
The fate of the Venezuelan migrants who had already been transferred to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, a prison notorious for its harsh conditions, remained unclear, however, as a result of that decision.
Petitioners, through the American Civil Liberties Union and Democracy Forward Foundation, must first prove that the migrants are being held under U.S. control in order to file a lawsuit before Boasberg. A. not El Salvador’s government, as the Justice Department contended.
Boasberg ordered the Trump administration to provide all “documents memorializing, documenting, or describing the arrangements between the United States and El Salvador” pertaining to the detention of the alleged Venezuelan gang members, as well as all correspondence pertaining to specific undisclosed material under court seal, in order to address that question.
He also permitted petitioners to ask for verification that the U. S. . urged and consented to pay El Salvador to detain the migrants at CECOT; that Washington has not taken any action to demand or secure their return; and that El Salvador has not previously filed criminal charges, found anyone guilty, or sought the deportation of any detainee.
Boasberg’s order concerned Abrego García because, according to the Venezuelan migrants’ claim, President Donald Trump stated to ABC News last month that he could have Abrego García returned if he so desired.
They also quoted Vice President Félix Ulloa of El Salvador as saying that his nation is holding those the U.S. has designated as a “service” to the U.S. S. . The government.
U.S. S. . District Judge Paula Xinis, who is presiding over a lawsuit filed by Abrego García’s family against the administration, seemed to be just as irritated as the family’s attorneys about the administration’s failure to provide information about any actions they have taken to comply with the court’s orders to support his return.
Government officials who claimed to know very little about the situation responded with “a bunch of ‘I don’t knows,'” according to Xinis, who said she had ordered the administration to provide daily updates and then adhere to an expedited discovery schedule.
To a Justice Department lawyer, Xinis remarked, “I don’t want to tell you how long it took my wonderful law clerks to count up the ‘I don’t knows'” from Trump administration officials’ deposition recordings.
During a hearing that lasted more than two hours on Friday, Xinis made remarks. A portion of the hearing was closed to the public. She stated that she would make a written decision about the case’s ongoing discovery in the next few days.
The hearing was held after Abrego García’s attorneys accused the Trump administration of failing to provide any proof of even “the slightest effort” to help him get out of El Salvadorian custody as the Supreme Court had mandated.
Lawyers from the Justice Department have retorted that the administration has given “extensive information and documents” regarding the measures it is taking to bring Abrego García back, but they have also maintained that these facts are “state secrets” and that revealing them would endanger national security.
Trump and his deputies have stated repeatedly that they have no plans to bring Abrego García back, which has led to the legal battle over court-ordered fact-finding. Their defiant position is based on unfounded claims that he is a violent criminal, even though he has no criminal history. The Justice Department has acknowledged that his deportation and imprisonment were unlawful due to an “administrative error” that occurred after a judge prohibited his removal to El Salvador.
Several Trump administration officials were to be deposed as part of an expedited discovery plan that Xinis set deadlines for last month. Joseph N. Evan C. and Mazzara, the Department of Homeland Security’s acting general counsel. A court document states that Katz, an assistant director at Immigration and Customs Enforcement, was deposed on April 22. Robert L. According to the filing, Cerna II, the acting director of the ICE field office, was deposed on May 7.
However, according to Abrego García’s attorneys, those conversations have yielded little information.
According to a recent filing by Abrego García’s attorneys, “the Government has repeatedly blocked Plaintiffs by claiming unsupported privileges — mainly state secrets and deliberative process — to withhold written discovery and to counsel witnesses not to answer even basic questions.”.
Then Xinis agreed on Friday.
Xinis revealed to a Justice Department attorney that “each of those depositions, to varying degrees, were an exercise in utter frustration.”.
If information disclosure would jeopardize national security interests, the government may forbid it under the “state secrets” privilege. Lawyers for the Justice Department contend that revealing details of any attempts to free Abrego García would deter foreign governments from cooperating with the United States. A. since it would be seen as a betrayal of trust by them.
“Similarly, the United States’ credibility would be undermined by invalidating its assurances that information will remain confidential if third parties could obtain the type of information Plaintiffs seek, such as the content of ongoing diplomatic negotiations,” according to a Justice Department filing.
The government has not presented any evidence “that would disturb the common sense conclusion that there are no genuine state secrets at play here,” according to Abrego García’s attorneys, who have also argued that there are no military or intelligence operations involved. “.”.
A filing by Abrego García’s attorneys stated that responding to the requested discovery would not jeopardize national security because the government has made information about Abrego Garcia and its refusal to assist with his return public on multiple occasions, including in congressional testimony, public interviews, and social media posts. It’s more likely that the government’s claim of state secrets is an attempt to evade judicial oversight of its operations. “.”.
The discovery will help her create a record of the facts, according to Xinis, who has occasionally accused the administration of acting dishonestly and maintained the possibility of a contempt finding.
Many of Justice Department attorney Jonathan David Guynn’s claims on Friday, such as that Abrego García’s deportation did not amount to government misconduct insofar as some of the Trump administration’s claims of privilege to withhold information were concerned, were met with Xinis’s voice dripping with incredulity.
“Just to make sure I understand the government’s stance, is it not government misconduct to take someone off the streets of our state or nation without a warrant or other justification?” Xinis asked. All right. Okay. “”.
29-year-old Abrego García took the southern U.S. A. Around 2011, he crossed the border illegally after the Barrio 18 gang in El Salvador attempted to recruit him and threatened to kill him if he didn’t join. In 2019, he testified before an immigration judge. He currently weds Jennifer Vasquez Sura, a U.S. A. He has been raising three children with this citizen. Their standing as U. A. Being a citizen does not confer legal status on him.
He was accused by the Trump administration of being a member of MS-13 on the basis of a 2019 gang sheet created by a police detective in Prince George’s County, Maryland, who has since been discredited. He was not given the chance to contest the accusation in court prior to his deportation and incarceration, and his family has refuted it.
Because Abrego García was granted a humanitarian protection (also known as “withholding of removal”) by an immigration judge in 2019 who determined that his life would be in danger if he were returned to El Salvador, the Justice Department has acknowledged that his removal was unlawful.
The March flights’ passengers were transferred to CECOT. The Salvadoran government claims that the low-security prison where Abrego García was later moved does not house gang members.
On Friday, Guynn restated the Trump administration’s claim that Abrego García is an MS-13 member.
He explained, “They think he’s a member of the MS-13 gang, which is why he was sent to El Salvador and why he’s being held by El Salvador under Salvadoran law.”.
Guynn informed Xinis that Abrego García was in good health, according to the Salvadoran government the day before.
“He’s put on weight,” Guynn remarked.
Then, speaking to reporters and the dozen or so people who had gathered outside the federal courthouse in Maryland to support Abrego García, CASA legal director Ama Frimpong said his family was not particularly comforted by the news.
“Don’t tell us that he’s healthy, alive, and has gained weight,” Frimpong remarked. “Let him speak to his attorneys and family, let him be released from prison, and let him go home.”. “.”.
