The Trump administration implored a federal judge in Maryland to dissolve the preliminary injunction issued in the high-profile case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, arguing that the case should soon be dismissed because the government complied with the court’s order and returned Abrego Garcia to the U.S. after deported him to El Salvador’s notorious CECOT terrorist prison due to an “administrative error.”

The Justice Department on Tuesday said it planned to formally file a motion to dismiss the case “on mootness grounds,” asserting that Abrego Garcia’s presence in the country constitutes a “significant change in circumstances” and that “the critical issues in this case have been resolved.”

“Now, as has been widely reported, Defendants have done exactly what Plaintiffs asked for and what this Court ordered them to do: Plaintiff Abrego Garcia has been returned to the United States,” the DOJ wrote in its “Notice of Compliance” with the court’s preliminary injunction.

The four-page filing, which also seeks a stay on all case deadlines until the motion to dismiss is resolved, came in response to Abrego Garcia’s attorneys on Sunday steadfastly refusing to give up on the case.

Instead, his attorneys asked U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis to hold the administration in contempt of court, claiming the administration had orchestrated “an elaborate, all-of-government effort to defy court orders, deny due process, and disparage” the erroneously deported Maryland father — only to haul him back to the U.S. last week to face federal criminal charges. The filing stated that despite Abrego Garcia ultimately being returned stateside, characterizing the government’s conduct as being in compliance with Xinis’ court orders “is pure farce.”

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

“The Government flouted rather than followed the orders of this Court and the United States Supreme Court,” lawyers for the now-indicted migrant wrote.

But the administration on Monday essentially argued that its past conduct was being misconstrued by the plaintiffs, particularly since Abrego Garcia arrived in the U.S. on Friday.

“Plaintiffs’ response to this development is desperate and disappointing. In the face of Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States, they baselessly accuse Defendants of ‘foot-dragging’ and ‘intentionally disregarding this Court’s and the Supreme Court’s orders,’ when just the opposite is true,” the DOJ’s filing states. “Perhaps knowing that there is no legal basis for their accusations and arguments, Plaintiffs try to stoke this Court’s anger against Defendants.”

Such sentiments are seemingly at odds with the facts and history of the case, as the administration has repeatedly been harangued by Xinis for allegedly flouting orders from her, stonewalling, and appearing to intentionally “misconstrue the Supreme Court’s order” requiring officials to “facilitate” the return of Abrego Garcia months ago.

The administration also suggested that its supposed “good faith compliance” with the courts’ orders could be due to its “inability to share state secrets and other protected material” while diplomatic discussions with El Salvador were ongoing.

Again, those claims seem to fly in the face of the administration’s position in the case up until last week, as well as defiant statements from President Donald Trump and multiple high-level administration officials who stated that Abrego Garcia would never step foot on U.S. soil again.

“But the proof is in the pudding — Defendants have returned Abrego Garcia to the United States just as they were ordered to do,” the DOJ wrote in closing. “None of Plaintiffs’ hyperbolic arguments change that or justify further proceedings in this matter.”