An illegal immigrant first only described as a “Maryland father” by press outlets was ordered back from El Salvador on Friday after Judge Paula Xinis ruled that his deportation was an “illegal act.” The Trump administration has maintained that Kilmar Abrego Garcia had gang affiliations and had no right to remain in the country.
The fight over whether Garcia was legally deported began after the administration admitted in a court filing on Monday that his protected status was overlooked due to an “administrative error.” The man first entered the United States illegally over a decade ago, only attempting to claim asylum years later after a judge ordered his removal during the first Trump administration.
A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to bring a Maryland man back to the U.S. by midnight Monday after concluding that he was unlawfully deported to his home country of El Salvador despite an immigration court order that he not be sent there.
U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis issued the order Friday requiring the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia following an extraordinary hearing during which the government flatly admitted that he’d been deported in violation of federal law.
“This was an illegal act,” Xinis told a Justice Department lawyer. “Congress said you can’t do it, and you did it anyway.”
This sets up a massive showdown between the administration and the courts. The White House has already laid a marker down, stating that the courts lack the jurisdiction to bring Garcia back. Now that a judge has unequivocally ordered his return, all eyes are on what happens next. Will the administration comply and continue to fight this out in a courtroom, or will it simply ignore the ruling?
Then there’s another part of this. What if El Salvador doesn’t want to let Garcia come back? He is an El Salvadoran citizen, and they do have jurisdiction over him in that regard. Just because an American judge wants something doesn’t mean it’s necessarily possible to give it to him, especially when dealing with international affairs.
What’s not in doubt is that this will continue to be a hugely polarizing issue, given the gray areas involved in this specific case.
