A federal judge in Maryland ordered the Donald Trump administration for the second time to return Kilmar Ábrego García, an El Salvadoran migrant who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, despite having legal protection to remain in the United States.
This Sunday, Judge Paula Xinis of the Federal District Court reaffirmed her previous ruling and gave the government until 11:59 p.m. this Monday, April 7 to facilitate the return of Ábrego García from the Salvadoran maximum-security prison.
The magistrate warned that the deportation occurred "without legal authority," without justification for the detention or for the transfer to the Center for Terrorism Confinement (CECOT), a symbol of Nayib Bukele's "tough on crime" policy.
Ábrego García, 29 years old, was deported on March 15 on one of three flights organized by the Trump administration using the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century wartime law, to swiftly expel migrants accused of gang ties. While the other two flights were carrying Venezuelans, his was destined for El Salvador, despite the lack of a valid court order against him, as revealed by The New York Times.
The migrant had received a deportation hold in 2019 that protected him from being sent back to his home country, where he could face persecution from gangs. His case had also raised concerns due to the use of exceptional measures to justify his removal.
Married to a U.S. citizen and father of three children—one of whom has a disability—Ábrego lived in Maryland and worked as an apprentice tinsmith. His wife, Jennifer Stefania Vasquez Sura, celebrated the new court ruling amidst tears and cheers from a crowd that accompanied her outside the courthouse.
During the hearing, the attorney for the Department of Justice, Erez Reuveni, admitted that Ábrego "should not have been deported" and acknowledged that he did not know why he remained in detention. Shortly thereafter, he was placed on administrative leave, according to a report by CNN en Español. Judge Xinis harshly questioned the government for failing to provide credible evidence regarding the Salvadoran's alleged links to the MS-13 gang, an accusation used to justify his removal.
"When someone is accused of belonging to such a violent and predatory organization, a formal accusation, a complaint, and a rigorous criminal process must be presented. I have not heard that from the government yet," Xinis stated during the hearing.
The defense of the migrant, led by attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, believes that the case could set a precedent for other migrants affected by expedited deportations without due process. “It wasn’t the malice of trying to harm Kilmar,” he said. “It was the malice of indifference regarding whether or not the correct person is being deported.”
The Trump administration has requested the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to pause the ruling in the Xinis case. Local media outlets covering the case, such as Telemundo and Univision, report that the judge found the arguments stating that the government lacks jurisdiction over someone who is no longer in its custody to be invalid. “Having confessed to a serious error, they now argue that this court lacks power,” she wrote in her ruling.
The Attorney General Pam Bondi also criticized the suspended attorney, stating in an interview with Fox News Sunday that his comments were akin to a confession in a criminal trial. Meanwhile, former prosecutor Stacey Young, founder of Justice Connection, defended Reuveni, asserting that Department of Justice attorneys must confront impossible dilemmas between presidential obedience and ethical duty.
In parallel, the case has caused fear and mobilization among migrant communities, especially among Salvadorans in Maryland.
As his family awaits news, Kilmar Ábrego García remains in one of the most dangerous prisons on the continent, with time running against him.
Frequently Asked Questions about the Deportation of Kilmar Ábrego García and U.S. Immigration Policy.
Why was Kilmar Ábrego García deported to El Salvador if he had judicial protection?
Kilmar Ábrego García was deported "by mistake" to El Salvador, despite having judicial protection in the United States. The administration of Donald Trump applied wartime legislation to carry out mass deportations, but there was no valid court order in his case. Federal judge Paula Xinis ordered his return to the U.S., stating that his deportation was "without legal authority."
What legal actions are being taken for Ábrego García's return to the U.S.?
Judge Paula Xinis has ordered the U.S. government to facilitate Ábrego García's return to the U.S. by midnight on April 7. The migrant's defense believes that this case could set a precedent for other migrants affected by expedited deportations without due process. However, the Trump administration has requested the Appeals Court to pause the ruling.
What implications does the deportation of Ábrego García have for other U.S. immigration policies?
The case of Ábrego García has raised alarm among advocates for migrant rights, who fear that the Trump administration is using strategies to evade judicial oversight. The policy of deporting migrants to countries like El Salvador, in collaboration with the government of Nayib Bukele, has faced significant criticism for human rights violations and lack of due process.
How does the relationship between the U.S. and El Salvador affect the context of deportations?
The relationship between the U.S. and El Salvador has focused on cooperation in security and migration. Both governments have worked together on the deportation of alleged gang members to the CECOT mega-prison in El Salvador. This collaboration has been criticized by human rights organizations due to the detention conditions in El Salvador and the use of unsubstantiated accusations to justify the deportations.
Filed under:
