Trump DOJ Accuses Judge of ‘Clear Legal Error’ in Dispute Over Abrego Garcia’s Deportation to West Africa

A Maryland federal judge’s decision to release Kilmar Abrego Garcia from ICE detention has sparked criticism from the Trump administration, which accuses her of committing “clear legal errors.” The administration contends that Judge Paula Xinis, appointed by former President Barack Obama, has misled the court in the habeas case involving Abrego Garcia.

In a 13-page document submitted last Friday, the Department of Justice urged Judge Xinis to revoke two injunctions, issued in August 2025 and February 2026, that currently stand in the way of Abrego Garcia’s deportation to West Africa. The administration claims that Xinis is the sole obstacle preventing his removal from the United States.

The government argues that Judge Xinis herself is responsible for the delays in Abrego Garcia’s deportation. They assert that she mandated his release from custody while simultaneously blocking the government from deporting him to a third country, thereby creating the very delay she later criticized.

“The Court cannot both impose the impediment that delays removal and consequently prolongs detention and, at the same time, hold that the resulting detention is impermissibly prolonged,” the filing states, pinpointing what they see as Xinis’ legal missteps in keeping Abrego Garcia in the U.S. and out of detention.

The Trump administration has expressed its readiness to deport Abrego Garcia to Liberia, claiming it is both “willing” and “able” to do so, despite his earlier wrongful deportation to El Salvador.

“This Court should dissolve the active injunctions […] as both rest on clear legal errors and neither is equitable when applied prospectively. Dissolution is warranted as a factual matter based on the declaration submitted as Exhibit A to this motion, which establishes that the United States government presently stands ready, willing, and able to remove Petitioner to Liberia, and the only impediment to Petitioner’s removal is the Court’s injunction barring Petitioner’s removal,” the filing went on.

What followed was a complaint about Xinis’ decision to leave the government’s dissolution motion pending “for months” on end, claiming the judge “failed to acknowledge that the Court’s own prior injunction against removal is the sole impediment to Petitioner’s prompt removal.” The government framed that as an inexplicable about-face, considering the judge “invited the government to move to dissolve the injunction barring Petitioner’s removal when it was ready to effectuate the removal” of Abrego Garcia.

“This Court committed clear legal error by not recognizing the impact of its own preliminary injunction barring Plaintiff’s removal,” the DOJ added.

As Law&Crime reported in December, Xinis ruled that the Trump administration held Abrego Garcia “without lawful authority” and “affirmatively misled” the court on Costa Rica’s willingness to accept him as a refugee. While the government had floated its intentions to deport Abrego Garcia to various African countries, whether Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana, or Liberia, the petitioner expressed a willingness to self-deport to Costa Rica.

The judge then ripped the administration for “their misrepresentation to the Court that Liberia is now the only country available to Abrego Garcia[.]”

In the present day, the DOJ contends that it is prepared to send the petitioner to Liberia and that Xinis’ orders are the lone roadblock to an “extremely expeditious” removal.

“The Court’s orders barring Petitioner’s removal and barring any brief detention incident to removal are the only impediment to Petitioner’s immediate removal. It is clearly erroneous, and a manifest injustice, to permit a petitioner to manufacture a legal obstacle to his removal and then hold that that legal obstacle suffices to prevent detention pending removal,” the DOJ said, seeking a ruling by April 17.