A federal judge summarily rejected the Trump administration’s excuses for not even trying to bring a Maryland father who was erroneously deported to an El Salvador terrorist prison back to the U.S., ordering government officials to turn over evidence of their supposed efforts so far — and indicating she may ultimately hold the administration in contempt.
At a court hearing Tuesday afternoon at the federal courthouse in Greenbelt, Maryland, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis reminded government lawyers that the Supreme Court was “clear” last week in demanding that the White House take steps to bring back Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia.
“To date, what the record shows is that nothing has been done. Nothing,” Xinis told lawyers at the Department of Justice, later adding, “The question is, what steps are you going to take here?”
Xinis greenlit what she called “two weeks of targeted discovery,” during which the Justice Department must turn over answers and government records to attorneys representing the Maryland father — whom Immigration and Customs Enforcement has already admitted to deporting due to an “administrative error.” Abrego Garcia lived in Maryland as an undocumented immigrant for years before an immigration judge granted him protected status in 2019 that prohibited the U.S. from deporting him back to El Salvador for fear of gang violence.
Xinis’ order would include new depositions of at least four government officials who’ve already submitted sworn declarations in court filings about Abrego Garcia’s status: Robert L. Cerna, an acting ICE supervisor in Texas; Michael G. Kozak, a senior official at the State Department; Evan C. Katz, the assistant director of ICE’s removal division; and Joseph N. Mazzara, the Department of Homeland Security’s acting general counsel.
Questioning under oath via depositions typically creates the factual foundation of a case, and Xinis made clear she is prepared to punish the government if officials reveal that they continue to defy court orders.
Drew Ensign, the DOJ lawyer who oversees immigration litigation as a deputy assistant attorney general, protested that the Trump administration was opposed to turning over any evidence at the moment. When he asked to slow things down, the judge wouldn’t budge.
“Cancel vacation. Cancel other appointments,” Xinis said. “I expect all hands on deck.”
Ensign also reiterated President Donald Trump’s view that his dealings with El Salvador are entirely beyond the authority of any court.
The case has quickly moved through the federal court system — and become yet another crisis pitting a recalcitrant Trump administration against the nation’s judiciary.
Abrego Garcia was snatched by security forces on March 12 and quickly shipped to El Salvador’s anti-gang mega-prison, the Terrorism Confinement Center. On April 4, Xinis ordered his immediate return, but the instructions were blocked by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. All nine high court justices later commanded that Trump officials “‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.”
The White House has remained defiant. Trump held a bilateral summit at the White House on Monday with El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, with administration officials claiming on camera that there was nothing they could do to bring Abrego Garcia back to the U.S.
Minutes before the Tuesday hearing, the DOJ filed a status report to the court that added a curious caveat in the form of a concession from a DHS official that in reality does nothing to follow the judge’s ruling to take steps to bring him back.
“DHS is prepared to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s presence in the United States in accordance with those processes if he presents at a port of entry,” Mazzara wrote in a sworn declaration.
That added clause — suggesting that Abrego Garcia could somehow show up at a U.S. airport or border crossing point — is implausible given that he is still being held against his will by Salvadoran prison guards at the behest of the Trump administration.
In court, Xinis said that proposition plainly fell short of reality, telling Ensign that the government’s newfound definition of “facilitate … flies in the face of the plain meaning of the word.”
“Have you done it? … To assure or to facilitate that Mr. Abrego Garcia is presented at the border?” she asked.
“No, your Honor—”
“If you haven’t done it, then the rest is hypothetical,” the judge interrupted.
All through the hearing, a crowd of roughly 100 protesters could be heard chanting outside the courthouse’s front doors, demanding for Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States. Demonstrators held signs and waved a Three Arrows flag, a symbol originally used by democratic resistance fighters in 1930s Germany who opposed the Nazi Party.
—
Jose Pagliery is a reporter at NOTUS.