Share and Follow
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 updates that the Trump administration has been providing to representatives of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland dad who was mistakenly deported and sent to El Salvador, contain “nothing of substance” as the administration also “refuses to respond to interrogatories” that it claims are “based on the false premise that the United States can or has been ordered to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release,” according to the deported man’s lawyers — completely contradicting what the U.S. Supreme Court actually said.
In a joint request filed Monday night requesting a conference before U.S. District Judge Paule Xinis, Abrego Garcia’s lawyers and attorneys from the Justice Department each presented their latest positions on the contentious issue, which has resulted in multiple lawsuits over President Donald Trump’s unprecedented use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 (AEA), a wartime authority previously invoked only three times, the last of which was during World War II.
Abrego Garcia’s lawyers want the judge to officially address the government’s alleged “failure to comply” with orders.
“On the eve of the first Court-ordered deposition concerning the Government’s failure to comply with this Court’s orders, the Government responded to Plaintiffs’ discovery requests by producing nothing of substance,” they alleged. “Its document production consists entirely of public filings from the dockets, copies of Plaintiffs’ own discovery requests and correspondence, and two nonsubstantive cover emails transmitting declarations filed in this case. Its interrogatory responses are similarly non-responsive.”
Abrego Garcia’s team noted how the district court granted expedited discovery “to ascertain what, if anything,” the Trump administration has done to “facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release from custody” and to “ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.” They pointed out how the protected Maryland dad is “entitled to explore the lawful basis — if any” for his deportation and to find out who authorized placement in El Salvador’s Centro de Confinamiento de Terrorismo (CECOT) and who “presently authorizes” his continued detention.
“The Government refuses to provide any documents ‘concerning the legal basis for Abrego Garcia’s confinement,”” Abrego Garcia’s lawyers said. “The Government maintains that any information regarding the agreement between the United States and El Salvador to detain individuals in El Salvador is ‘irrelevant,’ despite this Court’s finding that Plaintiffs ‘are entitled to explore the lawful basis.”
More from Law&Crime: ‘DHS would take him’: Trump admin doubles down on barring wrongly deported dad’s return as attorneys allege president is ignoring SCOTUS order
Instead, Abrego Garcia’s team says the information is “without question, directly relevant” to the Trump administration’s ability to “facilitate” his release, despite the Supreme Court’s unanimous April 10 order to the administration to do so. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers claim the government is refusing to provide information about purported “diplomatic discussions with El Salvador” that have been mentioned by DOJ lawyers, even though the Supreme Court’s has directed the administration to explain the “steps it has taken.”
The DOJ, meanwhile, insists it has made a “diligent and good faith effort” to obtain information that it says is “responsive to the expedited interrogatories.” It objects to the claims being made by Abrego Garcia’s team on the “false premise” that the U.S. can or has been ordered to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release.
Homeland Security Acting General Counsel Joseph Mazzara and other “parties” have been scheduled to be deposed Tuesday and Wednesday, according to the letter. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers apparently invited the Justice Department to “meet and confer” — or reach an agreement without court intervention — several times before the planned testimony, but the DOJ refused.
“Defendants also rejected Plaintiffs’ proposed ESI protocol, refused to disclose their search parameters, refused to provide any documents or even ‘commit to a timeline’ for doing so before the Court’s deadline of 5 p.m. today, and now — on the eve of depositions — have served incomplete and deficient responses,” the conference letter said. “At Plaintiffs’ request, the parties met and conferred at 7 p.m. tonight, at which time the Government stood on its currently deficient discovery responses.”
Three different courts have ordered the Trump administration and Department of Homeland Security, which is being sued by Abrego Garcia’s legal team, to “facilitate” his release after he filed a lawsuit in federal court. Abrego Garcia’s attorneys have accused the DOJ of flouting orders from the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland, instructing the government to return him to the United States as soon as possible.
A three-page filing on April 15 alleged that Trump administration officials have been intentionally misconstruing court orders since Abrego Garcia, whose wife and child are both U.S. citizens, was deported in “error” in March.
On April 10, the high court upheld Xinis’ prior order requiring the Trump administration to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from the Salvadoran work prison. Xinis then ordered the DOJ to inform her of Abrego Garcia’s current status and the steps the DOJ has taken and plans to take to “facilitate” his return to the U.S.
The Trump administration has been outwardly defiant, though, by repeatedly stonewalling the court with daily updates that provide Xinis with little to none of the information requested. Xinis tore into the Justice Department at a hearing on April 15 following yet another apparent nose-thumbing in court filings, saying she was fed up with the “gamesmanship” and “grandstanding” over the deportation case.
The DOJ filed an emergency motion to stay Xinis’ order with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday, April 16, along with court documents saying it would be appealing a recent order from U.S. District Judge James Boasberg that said there was probable cause to bring forward criminal contempt charges for the government’s alleged refusal to follow his order to return Venezuelan immigrants who were deported with Abrego Garcia on March 15. The Trump administration claimed in its plea to the appeals court that Xinis, a Barack Obama appointee, had “crossed” a constitutional line and created a “fishing expedition” with her judicial demands.
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.
