An attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice faced a highly skeptical judge in a Baltimore courtroom during a Friday morning hearing about the fast-approaching fate of Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

The Maryland father of three who was under protected status, erroneously deported to El Salvador, and then – after intense fanfare and attention – returned stateside only to find himself facing criminal charges, faces potential release on bond next week in Tennessee.

Now, the federal government wants to immediately lock him back up – in immigration detention where he could, yet again, face deportation to a third country, or so his lawyers say. Meanwhile, the lead DOJ lawyer arguing the Trump administration”s position claimed there are no concrete plans about what to do with the detainee, at least not yet.

But U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, a Barack Obama appointee, seemed all but wholly averse to the government’s lines.

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 major matter before the court was Abrego Garcia’s request for a restraining order barring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from taking him back into custody, barring ICE from attempting to deport him without sufficient notice – as well as an ancillary request that he be returned back to the Old Line State once he is released.

As the court ran through several issues related to those requests, government lawyers insisted they had a valid immigration detainer. At first, however, DOJ could not produce it – despite being ordered by the judge herself to have the document ready for her inspection.

Xinis did not much appreciate the delay and took umbrage at the thought of taking the government’s claim on any measure of faith.

“From day one you have taken the presumption of regularity and you’ve destroyed it, in my view,” the judge said, according to a courtroom report by Washington, D.C., CBS affiliate WUSA reporter Jordan Fischer.

The judge overseeing Abrego Garcia’s civil deportation and habeas corpus case made clear she has road-weary reasons to doubt the government’s assertions – after months of unlawful behavior.

“I’m deeply concerned that if there’s not some restraint on you that Mr. Abrego will be on another plane to another country with no notice to his lawyers,” the judge told the DOJ attorney. “Because that’s what you’ve done before.”

At one point during the hearing, the judge excoriated DOJ lawyer Sarmad Khojasteh for what she termed the government’s “utter refusal…to engage in any conversation about what’s going to happen” if and when Abrego Garcia is returned to ICE detention.

Far from a mere refusal, the government said the decision about what might happen after Abrego Garcia is detained by ICE had not even been considered. The court rejected that argument out of hand.

“It defies reality that this case is going to be left to a desk officer, and that more you press that the more it concerns me,” Xinis said.

As the marathon hearing stretched into the afternoon hour – after already stretching into its second day – the battle lines more or less firmed up: the government insisted that it has removal authority and therefore detention authority; Abrego Garcia’s side insisted the government was angling for a “rigged game,” according to a courtroom report by Lawfare senior editor Roger Parloff.

The contours of that rigged game look something like the current state of affairs in which the government is trying to have things both ways, Abrego Garcia’s attorneys argued – by claiming both that he can be deported but also declining to say which country authorities plan on deporting him to. That means the prospect of irreparable harm is imminent, attorney Andrew Rossman argued near the end of the hearing.

Inset: President-elect Donald Trump on “Meet the Press” Sunday, Dec. 8, 2024 (NBC News/YouTube). Background: Immigration records for Kilmar Abrego Garcia (WTTG/YouTube).

The judge, for her part, seemed to lean toward Abrego Garcia’s understanding of the situation.

During one back-and-forth, Khojasteh rubbished the plaintiff’s claims – saying they were too “speculative” and not “ripe” enough for the court to even consider before Abrego Garcia’s release, according to a courtroom report by Lawfare senior editor Anna Bower.

Xinis pushed back.

“But fact is that it’ll be ripe on a certain day on a certain hour and Mr. Abrego will be moved,” she told the government lawyer, “and before we know it, he’s on a plane and I’ve lost jurisdiction.”

The court also gave an indication of the direction things were heading during a lengthy discussion about the country’s obligations under the Convention Against Torture and asylum laws.

While discussing the singular or “one of one” nature of the case with Rossman, the judge mused whether any potential third country could possibly be safe for Abrego Garcia due to the Trump administration labeling him a member of MS-13.

“What’s that going to do for any country that this man has to face a third party removal to?” Xinis asked, according to a courtroom report by Politico reporter Kyle Cheney.

The hearing ended with the judge declining to rule from the bench – saying she would issue a formal order with due haste. As far as the substance of that order, Xinis appeared attuned to the notion that her ruling should precede whatever ruling comes from U.S. District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr. – whether or not the Volunteer State judge’s decision makes matters moot in Maryland.

Notably, the court also hinted heavily her ruling might be amenable to Abrego Garcia – saying she was not simply going to issue an advisory opinion but intended to maintain her jurisdiction and address the plaintiff’s concerns before he is detained by ICE.

And, if the judge’s treatment of the lawyers during the hearing was any indication, the court’s forthcoming decision is a fait accompli.

At one point the lead DOJ attorney received a rhetorical upbraiding for walking right into a direct disagreement with the judge on the evidence marshaled by the parties throughout the case so far.

Xinis had just chastised the DOJ for what she viewed as repeatedly taking positions that turned out to be false. The government balked.

“When did we do that?” Khojasteh asked.

To which the judge replied: “I’m not here to answer your questions.”