Abrego Garcia Faces Third-Country Deportation Battle \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ President Trump’s administration plans to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to a third country, despite ongoing U.S. criminal charges. His lawyers fear removal before trial and have requested court intervention. The deportation defies a 2019 immigration judge’s ruling and risks a constitutional conflict.
Quick Looks
- Abrego Garcia faces deportation to a non-native third country.
- U.S. lawyers request Maryland judge to block removal.
- Trial for human smuggling charges pending in Tennessee.
- 2019 immigration ruling barred deportation to El Salvador.
- ICE’s autonomy complicates judicial intervention on deportation.
Deep Look
President Donald Trump’s administration is once again in the spotlight for its aggressive and legally complex deportation tactics, this time involving Kilmar Abrego Garcia—a Maryland resident who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador earlier this year despite a standing court order prohibiting his removal. Now, after returning Abrego Garcia to the U.S. for prosecution, the Trump administration is preparing to deport him once more—this time to an unnamed third country.
The situation unfolded during an emergency court conference call on Thursday, where Department of Justice attorney Jonathan Guynn confirmed that the administration intends to initiate removal proceedings to a “third country.” However, Guynn emphasized that there were “no imminent plans” to deport Abrego Garcia and assured U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis that the administration would comply with court directives.
Despite that assurance, Abrego Garcia’s attorneys voiced urgent concerns that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) could attempt a rapid deportation—possibly over a weekend—before the legal process plays out. Attorney Jonathan Cooper, speaking on the call, told Judge Xinis, “We have concerns that the government may try to remove Mr. Abrego Garcia quickly.”
Abrego Garcia’s legal team has filed an emergency motion in Maryland federal court, requesting Judge Xinis to order his transfer from Tennessee—where he’s currently detained—to Maryland. The goal: to ensure he is not deported again before standing trial in the U.S. on human smuggling charges. His attorneys also argue that keeping him in Maryland would allow him to be closer to his family and legal representation while shielding him from ICE’s autonomous actions.
Judge Xinis, however, indicated that she could not act immediately, citing the need to first address the Trump administration’s pending motions to dismiss the civil case filed by Abrego Garcia’s wife over his earlier wrongful deportation. She has scheduled a hearing for July 7 to weigh the emergency request and related legal matters.
This case represents a rare intersection of criminal prosecution, immigration enforcement, and civil litigation—all colliding under the increasingly assertive immigration policies of President Trump’s second term. The President has remained unapologetically hardline on immigration, even in cases like Abrego Garcia’s, where deportation defies previous legal protections.
Abrego Garcia’s ordeal began in March, when he was wrongfully deported to El Salvador despite a 2019 immigration judge’s ruling that explicitly barred his removal. That ruling cited credible threats to his life from local gangs who had previously targeted him and his family. U.S. officials later acknowledged the deportation violated the order, calling it an “administrative error.” Nevertheless, Trump officials have since attempted to portray Abrego Garcia as linked to the MS-13 gang—an accusation he firmly denies.
Under mounting pressure, the Trump administration brought Abrego Garcia back to the U.S. on June 7 to face newly unsealed human smuggling charges. At a press conference, Attorney General Pam Bondi declared: “This is what American justice looks like.” However, just weeks later, the administration now appears poised to deport him again—this time not to El Salvador but to an undisclosed “third country,” raising new legal and ethical questions.
The criminal case against Abrego Garcia stems from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee, where he was found driving a vehicle with nine passengers and no luggage. His attorneys argue that the charges are a retroactive attempt to justify the earlier illegal deportation and cast doubt on the strength of the case.
Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes in Tennessee ruled that Abrego Garcia was neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community and granted conditional release. However, she delayed his release out of concern that ICE would act independently and deport him before the case proceeds. Holmes expressed frustration with the limits of her judicial authority, stating: “I don’t think I have any authority over ICE.”
Acting U.S. Attorney Rob McGuire, appearing at the Tennessee hearing, pledged to do his best to coordinate with immigration authorities but noted, “That’s a separate agency with separate leadership and separate directions.” This comment underscored the often chaotic nature of inter-agency operations within the Trump administration, where policy cohesion has been routinely challenged by jurisdictional gaps and political motives.
Abrego Garcia’s attorneys argue that without swift intervention from the Maryland court, their client could once again be unjustly removed from U.S. jurisdiction. “If this Court does not act swiftly, then the Government is likely to whisk Abrego Garcia away to some place far from Maryland,” they warned.
Beyond the legal wrangling, this case highlights broader tensions in Trump’s immigration strategy: a deep reliance on enforcement-first policies, often at the expense of due process and existing legal protections. The renewed threat of deportation, especially to a third country with no confirmed safety guarantees, raises serious humanitarian and constitutional questions.
The fact that Abrego Garcia had lived in Maryland for over a decade with his American wife and children, and that an immigration judge had previously recognized his risk of persecution, only heightens the stakes. His wife’s civil suit against the Trump administration—now overseen by Judge Xinis—contends that his earlier deportation violated not only federal law but also the basic rights owed to anyone under U.S. jurisdiction.
As Trump continues to double down on immigration enforcement, the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia may become a pivotal legal flashpoint in the broader debate over judicial authority, executive power, and the future of U.S. immigration policy. Whether the courts will block this second deportation attempt—or if Trump’s administration will once again override legal safeguards—remains to be seen.
Abrego Garcia Faces
You must Register or Login to post a comment.