Attorneys representing Kilmar Abrego Garcia have accused the Trump administration of misleading the court regarding another country’s willingness to accept him. They claim that these alleged misrepresentations and acts of “vindictiveness” extend to the highest levels of federal government leadership.

Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national with protected status in the United States, was deported in March to a notorious prison in El Salvador. His legal team states that another Central American country, Costa Rica, has expressed readiness to accept him as a refugee. However, the lawyers argue that “misrepresentations” by the Trump administration jeopardize this possibility. In a five-page legal filing submitted on Monday, they assert that government actions could impede Abrego Garcia’s relocation to his preferred destination, Costa Rica.

The filing reads, “The government continues to demonstrate its willingness to mislead the courts regarding the feasibility of Mr. Abrego’s removal to Costa Rica, seemingly to punish him further.”

Abrego Garcia’s legal team has also submitted a notice updating witnesses and exhibits in preparation for an upcoming hearing in Tennessee. Here, he faces human smuggling charges, which his attorneys have labeled a “sham.” They have called for the charges to be dismissed, arguing that the prosecution is both vindictive and selectively targeted.

This case is distinct from another legal battle in Maryland, where Abrego Garcia has sued the Trump administration over his deportation. Notably, a Department of Justice attorney has acknowledged that his deportation was improper due to his protected status.

In Monday’s notice, the defendant’s lawyers principally argued two things: Though they do not need to prove “actual vindictiveness,” the administration has obstructed them from obtaining the necessary documents or calling the witnesses “whose testimony would be necessary” to do so; and that the administration cannot deny “the presumption of vindictiveness” without bringing in officials at the very top of the administration.

“The defense has issued subpoenas to three DOJ witnesses,” including Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, the notice reads. “The government has moved to quash those subpoenas. That decision is, of course, the government’s to make.”

“But the status quo of continued vindictiveness, including the government misleading the court in the District of Maryland about Costa Rica’s willingness to accept Mr. Abrego as a refugee only further cements the reality that the government cannot rebut the presumption of vindictiveness with just the testimony of two supervisory DHS special agents,” Abrego Garcia’s attorneys assert, “especially when the Court has already found a realistic likelihood that this indictment was the result of the vindictiveness of ‘senior DOJ and [Department of Homeland Security] officials.’”

The attorneys wrote that “the government’s misrepresentations to Judge [Paula] Xinis about whether Costa Rica would accept Mr. Abrego confirm that the retaliatory animus toward Mr. Abrego originates at the highest levels of DOJ and DHS.”

Fewer than two weeks ago, the defendant’s lawyers argued to U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw in Tennessee that “the government is willing to mislead the courts and defy court orders intended to shed light on its conduct, all in service of punishing Mr. Abrego.” They expressed the “need for discovery into the motivations of the high-level officials who initiated this prosecution and are ultimately responsible for the government’s misrepresentations regarding Mr. Abrego’s third-country removal.”

That filing appeared to be an effort to bring Crenshaw up to speed on developments in Abrego Garcia’s Maryland habeas case. Instead of accepting the defendant’s claim that Costa Rica has agreed to take him, the Trump administration has sought to deport him to Africa, “where he does not speak the language, has no connections, and questions remain as to whether he would live freely.”

Abrego Garcia’s legal battle against the Trump administration has been emblematic of the second Donald Trump White House’s immigration agenda. The Maryland man has become a figurehead of sorts of the challenge to the federal government’s deportation plans, which, at times, have come under harsh scrutiny by federal judges.

The hearing on the motion to dismiss for vindictive and selective prosecution is slated for Dec. 8 and 9.