This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . The next check for changes will be

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/23/kilmar-abrego-garcia-judge-trump-bad-faith

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Federal judge accuses White House of ‘bad faith’ in Kilmar Ábrego García case Federal judge accuses White House of ‘bad faith’ in Kilmar Ábrego García case
(about 4 hours later)
Judge gives Trump administration deadline to support its claims it doesn’t have to return man to the US Trump administration pushes back hours after judge gives deadline to support its claims it doesn’t have to return man to the US
The federal court that has found itself in a pitched battle with the executive branch over the summary removal of Salvadorian Kilmar Ábrego García despite a previous order against deportation has now accused the Trump administration of “bad faith” in the case. The federal court that has found itself in a pitched battle with the executive branch over the summary removal of Salvadorian Kilmar Ábrego García despite a previous order against deportation has now accused the Trump administration of “bad faith” in the case – but received fresh pushback within hours.
US district judge Paula Xinis has given the Trump administration until 6pm ET on Wednesday to provide details to support its claims that it does not have to comply with orders to return the man to the US, where he was living and working in Baltimore, because of special privilege. US district judge Paula Xinis had given the Trump administration until 6pm ET on Wednesday to provide details to support its claims that it does not have to comply with orders to return the man to the US, where he was living and working in Baltimore, because of special privilege.
Xinis castigated the administration late on Tuesday saying it is ignoring court orders and obstructing the legal process.Xinis castigated the administration late on Tuesday saying it is ignoring court orders and obstructing the legal process.
“For weeks, defendants have sought refuge behind vague and unsubstantiated assertions of privilege, using them as a shield to obstruct discovery and evade compliance with this court’s orders,” Xinis wrote.“For weeks, defendants have sought refuge behind vague and unsubstantiated assertions of privilege, using them as a shield to obstruct discovery and evade compliance with this court’s orders,” Xinis wrote.
“Defendants have known, at least since last week, that this court requires specific legal and factual showings to support any claim of privilege. Yet they have continued to rely on boilerplate assertions. That ends now,” she added, giving the new deadline for information.“Defendants have known, at least since last week, that this court requires specific legal and factual showings to support any claim of privilege. Yet they have continued to rely on boilerplate assertions. That ends now,” she added, giving the new deadline for information.
However, late on Wednesday morning, the Trump administration took fresh counter steps against the federal judge’s orders to produce information about the steps it has taken, if any, to return Ábrego García to the US after he was, by the government’s admission, mistakenly removed to El Salvador without even a court hearing.
Drew Ensign, a deputy assistant attorney general, filed a sealed motion asking for a stay of the order to provide sworn testimony and documents about efforts to return the man, who was living and working in Baltimore and subject to court protection against deportation to his native El Salvador before he was arrested by the immigration authorities last month and detained then removed.
The White House asked Xinis for a stay of seven days of her order and was also requesting relief from providing daily status updates on Ábrego García’s status and any efforts to get him back to the US.
The US supreme court ordered the Trump administration nearly two weeks ago to facilitate Ábrego García’s return to the US from a notorious Salvadorian prison, rejecting the White House’s claim that it couldn’t retrieve him despite the administration having admitted previously in court that it had sent him out of the country by mistake.The US supreme court ordered the Trump administration nearly two weeks ago to facilitate Ábrego García’s return to the US from a notorious Salvadorian prison, rejecting the White House’s claim that it couldn’t retrieve him despite the administration having admitted previously in court that it had sent him out of the country by mistake.
Ábrego García, a native Salvadorian, and more than 200 Venezuelans were flown to El Salvador by the US authorities last month without due process and despite a federal court order for them not to leave the US and for any flights containing them that were in the air to turn around. Ábrego García and more than 200 Venezuelans were flown to El Salvador by the US authorities last month without due process despite a federal court order for them not to leave the US and for any flights containing them that were in the air to turn around.
His wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, who has been campaigning for his release, has had to flee to a secret location because her address was revealed when US officials mistakenly posted a document featuring it on the internet, according to a Washington Post report. Donald Trump claims Ábrego García is a violent gangster but the authorities have not substantiated that allegation in court. He has not been charged with any crimes.
The supreme court and other federal courts have begun flexing their muscles to push back on Donald Trump’s efforts to defy judicial orders, escalating a hugely consequential battle over the rule of law.The supreme court and other federal courts have begun flexing their muscles to push back on Donald Trump’s efforts to defy judicial orders, escalating a hugely consequential battle over the rule of law.
The developing dynamic in recent weeks underscores how a constitutional crisis between the president with his executive branch and the courts is likely to be a push and pull between the government and judges that is simmering through the legal system and could very well break it. Both the US president and the president of El Salvador have claimed they can’t return Ábrego García. The administration has also claimed the right to “government privilege” or other secrecy rules.
Trump administration officials have pushed back in the case, arguing that it is up to El Salvador – though the president of El Salvador has also said he lacks the power to return Ábrego García. The administration has also argued that information about any steps it has taken or could take to return him is protected by attorney-client privilege laws, state secret laws, general “government privilege” or other secrecy rules. Xinis on Tuesday said those claims, without any facts to back them , reflected a “willful and bad faith refusal to comply with discovery obligations”.
Xinis on Tuesday said those claims, without any facts to back them up, reflected a “willful and bad faith refusal to comply with discovery obligations”. Two other federal judges also on Tuesday extended temporary blocks on some deportations of Venezuelan migrants and signaled that Trump’s invocation of a 1798 law historically used in wartime to speed up their removal from the US may not survive judicial review.
Meanwhile three-judge panel on the fourth US circuit court of appeals scolded the administration last week, saying its claim that it can’t do anything to free Ábrego García “should be shocking”. That ruling came one day after another federal judge in Washington DC, James Boasberg, found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt of court for violating his orders to turn around planes carrying deportees to El Salvador in a different legal case.
And two other federal judges also on Tuesday extended temporary blocks on some deportations of Venezuelan migrants and signaled that Trump’s invocation of a 1798 law historically used in wartime to speed up their removal from the US may not survive judicial review.
Denver-based US district judge Charlotte Sweeney wrote in a ruling that Trump’s administration must give Venezuelan migrants detained in Colorado notice 21 days in advance before any removals from the US under the Alien Enemies Act and must inform them of their right to challenge their removal.Denver-based US district judge Charlotte Sweeney wrote in a ruling that Trump’s administration must give Venezuelan migrants detained in Colorado notice 21 days in advance before any removals from the US under the Alien Enemies Act and must inform them of their right to challenge their removal.
And at a court hearing in Manhattan, US district judge Alvin Hellerstein appeared inclined to require the administration to notify Venezuelans at least 10 days in advance before removing them under that 18th-century law. Hellerstein said the administration must afford migrants due process, as required by the US constitution. And at a court hearing in Manhattan, US district judge Alvin Hellerstein appeared inclined to require the administration to notify Venezuelans at least 10 days in advance before removing them under that 18th-century law, and afford people due process, as required by the US constitution.
“This is not a secret court, an inquisition in medieval times. This is the United States of America,” Hellerstein said.“This is not a secret court, an inquisition in medieval times. This is the United States of America,” Hellerstein said.
Hellerstein also said Trump’s 15 March proclamation invoking the law to fly the men to a prison in El Salvador may run afoul of the constitution’s eighth amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment.Hellerstein also said Trump’s 15 March proclamation invoking the law to fly the men to a prison in El Salvador may run afoul of the constitution’s eighth amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has begun revoking the temporary legal status of people who entered the country via an online appointment app at the US-Mexico border, as had been dreaded in some communities since Trump said: “Get ready to leave.”
More than 900,000 people came to the US legally, many after waiting for months south of the border in precarious conditions as they tried daily to snag one of the limited appointment on the Biden administration-created mobile phone app CBPOne.
Cancellation notices began landing in people’s inboxes in late March without warning, some telling recipients to leave immediately and others giving them seven days.
Targets also included some US citizens, particularly immigration lawyers, the Associated Press reported, who, according to authorities, were unintended recipients.
CBP confirmed in a statement that it issued notices terminating temporary legal status under CBP One. It did not say how many, just that they weren’t sent to all beneficiaries. Attorneys say some CBP One beneficiaries may still be within a one-year window to file an asylum claim or seek other relief. Notices have also been sent to others whose removal orders are on hold under other forms of temporary protection.
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed reportingThe Associated Press and Reuters contributed reporting