On Tuesday, the Trump administration moved to dismiss a civil lawsuit demanding that Kilmer Armando Abrego Garcia be returned to the U.S. They argued that the case is moot since he is already back in U.S. custody.
In a submission, administration lawyers informed U.S. District Judge Paula Sinis of their intention to file a formal motion to dismiss the case “on Mootness Grounds” by June 16. They indicated that the Justice Department executed the court’s order to bring Abrego Garcia back home after he was deported to El Salvador in March due to administrative errors that the Trump administration acknowledged.
However, this filing is unlikely to resolve the escalating legal disputes surrounding Abrego Garcia’s detention and the efforts for his release from Salvadoran custody.
Federal Judge James Boasberg has indicated there are grounds to criticize Trump over the deportation process. Upon his return to the U.S., Abrego Garcia was sent to Tennessee, where he faces federal charges linked to the transportation of undocumented immigrants stemming from an arrest a few years prior.
Court documents reveal that the Department of Justice filed these charges against him on May 21, raising new concerns about the broader investigation into related matters.
His legal team has characterized the timing of his return from El Salvador as a “pure farce” and stated intentions to pursue sanctions against the government as early as Wednesday.
In ongoing discussions, the Trump administration’s lawyers have maintained that they were not authorized to bring Abrego Garcia back to the U.S., even after his indictment.
They also expressed that a minimal charge and potential sanctions against the government seemed certain. Judge Sinis noted that Maryland courts still maintain jurisdiction over civil matters.
Last month, Sinis suggested that the administration might face consequences for non-compliance with court directives, indicating their lack of transparency during the discovery process as rather frustrating.
In a notable exchange, Judge Kagan firmly addressed Trump’s legal team, reminding them of the overarching authority of the courts.
Trump’s lawyers attempted to refute claims that they deliberately evaded the court’s proceedings, describing the plaintiffs’ movements as “hopeless and disappointing.” They asserted that disagreements over discovery resulted from the defendant’s failure to share pertinent state secrets and other protected materials required to show compliance with court orders.
The administration concluded with the assertion that they did, in fact, return Abrego Garcia to the U.S. as mandated.
Judge Sinis, appointed by Obama, previously criticized the administration for not complying with court information requests and issued a stern eight-page order calling their responses “ambiguous, evasive, and incomplete,” suggesting a willful disregard for discovery obligations.
