Following up on my updated time line on the Abrego Garcia case through June 7:
El Salvadoran Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia was legally residing in the United States. He crossed the border illegally in 2011 but received in 2019 a stay of removal due to immigration court finding over his application for asylum, stating likelihood that he would be persecuted by gangs in El Salvador. An allegation by a police officer in 2019 that Abrego Garcia by virtue of tattoos was a member of the M-13 was not pursued. He is married, with a child, and lived in the Baltimore area.
On March 12, 2025 he was pulled over driving his car by ICE personnel and taken into custody, being told that his legal status in the U.S. was revoked. On March 15 he was flown with many Venezuelans to El Salvador’s CECO (Terrorism Confinement Center) prison. (A dispute over the legality of this and other March 15 flights is being addressed in D.C. District Court- James Boasberg.)
On March 24 Abrego Garcia’s spouse sued the government in U.S. District Court in Maryland (Judge Paula Xinis) to return Abrego Garcia from El Salvador. (Go here for the March 24 suit and here for The Atlantic article.)
On March 31 The government told Judge Xinis in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation resulted from an “administrative error,” knowing before his deportation that an immigration court had approved his stay pending an asylum decision.
On April 4 Judge Xinis issued an initial ruling ordering the U.S. government to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return from El Salvador by midnight April 7. She criticized the government’s lack of evidence for its claims and described his deportation as a “grievous error” that violated federal law. “As Defendants acknowledge, they had no legal authority to arrest him, no justification to detain him, and no grounds to send him to El Salvador – let alone deliver him into one of the most dangerous prisons in the Western Hemisphere.” (Go here.)
The Trump administration appealed in the early hours of April 5 Judge Xinis’ order and requested an emergency stay of her decision. Among its arguments, the government said that the court has no power to force the government to retrieve a person in the custody of another country and asserted that Abrego Garcia had a “prominent role” in the M-13 gang. The government was relying solely on the assertion by a police officer in 2019. (Go here.)
Later on April 5 the government removed its attorney, Erez Reuveni, from the case and put him on administrative leave, cutting him off from email contact with the DOJ, criticizing him for displaying doubts about the case and expressing frustration with the failure of the government to respond to his requests for information. (Go here.)
On April 6, Judge Xinis reaffirmed her ruling in a scathing opinion. She rejected the administration’s argument that it lacked jurisdiction or authority to secure Abrego Garcia’s return. She emphasized that his detention in CECOT was “wholly lawless” and “shocks the conscience”. (Go here).
On April 10 the Supreme Court unanimously rules that District Court Judge Xinis can order the government to return Abrego Garcia to the United States. The order requires the Government to “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 court ruled that the scope of the term “effectuate” used by Xinis is unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive. The Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps.
In 2012, the ICE had issued Policy Directive 11061.1, titled “Facilitating the Return to the United States of Certain Lawfully Removed Aliens.” The directive does not describe the scope of “facilitating.” It does refer to return travel, which is the basis for the government to say that its obligations for facilitating are only to arrange for return travel..
During April 11 – 14 Judge Xinis amends her order, instructing the administration to “take all available steps to facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return and demands daily updates on their efforts. The government stalls, submits de minimis reports, some late, and misrepresents the Supreme Court’s ruling, saying that it has no legal power to acquire another government to return a prisoner under its own control.
On April 14 in a meeting between Presidents Trump and Bukele, Bukele told reporters it was “absurd” to ask if he would return Abrego Garcia. Bukele said, “Are you suggesting I smuggle a terrorist into the United States? How can I return him to the United States, like I smuggle him into the United States? Of course, I’m not going to do it.”
On April 15 Judge Xinis describes and severely criticizes the government’s failure to respond to her and the Supreme Court’s rulings and orders “expedited discovery.” By April 21, the government must respond to up to 15 written questions and provide up to 15 relevant documents. Depositions of four named officials must be completed by April 23. Plaintiffs can request to interview up to two more people if needed. Warning the government, she wrote: “Plaintiffs’ request for expedited discovery focuses on securing compliance with this Court’s amended order at ECF No. 51 and other related directives, and in the face of ongoing refusal to comply, to assist the Court in determining whether contempt proceedings are warranted….Should Defendants fail or refuse to engage in the above-described discovery in good faith, Plaintiffs are free to seek separate sanctions on an expedited basis.”
On April 17, ruling on an appeal by the government to Xinis’ discovery order, Appeals Court Judge Harvie Wilkinson blasts the government: “It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter. But in this case, it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.”
On April 18 DHS issues a report saying that Abrego Garcia is a suspected trafficker, based on a incident in 2022: “Kilmar Abrego Garcia is a MS-13 gang member, illegal alien from El Salvador, and suspected human trafficker. The facts reveal he was pulled over with eight individuals in a car on an admitted three-day journey from Texas to Maryland with no luggage…The facts speak for themselves, and they reek of human trafficking. The media’s sympathetic narrative about this criminal illegal gang member has completely fallen apart. We hear far too much about the gang members and criminals’ false sob stories and not enough about their victims.”
On April 24 Border Czar Tom Homan spoke to reporters: “We are not acting in bad faith. We removed a demonstrable public safety threat, a wife beater, a designated terrorist from the United States. He’s home, a citizen of El Salvador, who had two orders of removal by two separate immigration judges in the past. If he actually gets back, he will be detained again…I don’t think any court can order another nation, a sovereign nation, to take a citizen of its country and return him. I think he’s got plenty of due process (some paraphrased).
On April 24 Judge Xinis, after accusing the government on April 23 of “willful and bad faith refusal to comply with discovery obligations,” orders a stay until April 30 given confidential discussions between the plaintiffs and the government.
During May: Judge Xinis oversees confidential discussions between plaintiffs and the administration, including discovery. On May 16, she expresses frustration that the administration is dragging out the case.
On May 16 D.C District Judge James E. Boasberg, presiding over the case J.G.G. v. Trump gave the Trump administration one week to identify its efforts to return García, as well as 137 Venezuelan men deported to an El Salvador prison under the wartime Alien Enemies Act.
On May 21 a grand jury at the Nashville Division of the Middle Tennessee Federal District Court indicted Garcia for conspiracy to smuggle persons in the U.S. and conspiracy to smuggle within the U.S. over 1,000 undocumented person, with one hundred separate trips from the southwest (mainly Houston, it appears) to other destinations. The indictment also alleges that Garcia had at least five co-conspirators. Substantially all evidence tying Garcia to smuggling that is held be the prosecution appears to be based on interviews with co-conspirators in American prisons. The indictment mentions no fact directly showing action by Garcia is a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee, which appears to be the reason the case was brought in that state. The Indictment alleges that Garcia is a member of M-13, but does not charge him with any criminal acts associated with M-13. (Go here for the indictment and here for detailed analysis of the case.)
The indictment reportedly led to the resignation of federal prosecutor Ben Schrader, wjo led the criminal division of the U.S. Attorney’s office in Nashville. Schrader reported objected to what he reportedly thought was the political nature of the indictment. (Go here.)
On June 6: Attorney General Pam Bondi announces that Garcia has been returned to the United States from El Salvador and faces criminal charges. She alleges that Garcia was involved in illegal transportation of guns and drugs but no such charges were filed.
On June 7: Garcia appears in court in Nashville.