Importance Score: 78 / 100 🔴
Case of Deported Salvadoran Man Highlights Immigration Policy Under Trump
In a controversial immigration case, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man, faced detention and deportation by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). On March 12th, ICE agents detained Mr. Garcia while he was driving home in Maryland with his son. He was subsequently moved between detention centers in Louisiana and Texas. According to court documents, Mr. Garcia was then abruptly deported to El Salvador, his country of origin, and placed in a high-security prison known for housing gang members. This occurred without prior notification, legal procedures, or a formal hearing, raising questions about due process within the US immigration system.
Details of the Deportation
US authorities have described the deportation as an “administrative error.” However, despite this admission, Mr. Garcia remains incarcerated in El Salvador, creating a complex legal situation that lawyers are currently contesting. A Maryland court has mandated Mr. Garcia’s return to the United States. Conversely, officials under the Trump administration contend that they lack the power to compel El Salvador to facilitate his return, further asserting that the judge’s repatriation order exceeds judicial authority.
The Supreme Court has temporarily suspended lower court directives as they deliberate on this contentious matter, intensifying scrutiny on the Trump administration’s hardline immigration policies and their potential impact on immigrants’ due process rights.
Maureen Sweeney, Director of the University of Maryland’s Chacón Center for Immigrant Justice, commented on the broader implications, stating to news outlets, “If the US Supreme Court were to endorse [the Trump administration’s] stance, it would essentially eliminate the rule of law within immigration processes. This ruling could allow authorities to apprehend individuals arbitrarily and deport them anywhere without facing repercussions.”
Trump Administration Defends Actions
US District Judge Paula Xinis, in a legal filing on Sunday, asserted that ICE personnel failed to adhere to established protocols within the Immigration and Nationality Act during Mr. Garcia’s deportation to El Salvador. Judge Xinis ordered the US government to ensure his return by Monday midnight. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals concurred, stating that the US government “has no legal justification to seize a person lawfully present in the United States directly from the street.”
vCard.red is a free platform for creating a mobile-friendly digital business cards. You can easily create a vCard and generate a QR code for it, allowing others to scan and save your contact details instantly.
The platform allows you to display contact information, social media links, services, and products all in one shareable link. Optional features include appointment scheduling, WhatsApp-based storefronts, media galleries, and custom design options.
The Trump administration, however, maintains its inability to comply, arguing that Judge Xinis’s ruling exceeds her jurisdictional limits. US Solicitor General D. John Sauer, in a Supreme Court appeal, wrote, “Neither a federal district court nor the United States possesses the authority to dictate actions to the Government of El Salvador.”
Nicole Hallett, a law professor at the University of Chicago, clarified that while US judges cannot directly command El Salvador, they can instruct the US government to arrange for Mr. Garcia’s return. She highlighted precedents where the US successfully facilitated the return of individuals mistakenly deported.
Professor Hallett further questioned the government’s claim of powerlessness to compel El Salvador, pointing to existing agreements between the two nations. Reports from CBS News, a US news organization, indicate that the Trump administration allocated $6 million to El Salvador to accommodate prisoners deported from the US. High-ranking officials, including figures like then Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Trump, have openly acknowledged this arrangement.
Ms. Hallett suggested, “It appears as though the Salvadoran government is acting somewhat as an agent for the US government,” implying a greater feasibility for Mr. Garcia’s release. Mr. Garcia’s legal team has argued that given El Salvador’s detention of Mr. Garcia “at the explicit request and through financial compensation” from the US, the court is within its rights to compel the US government to request his repatriation.
Deported to Notorious Prison
Mr. Garcia is among a larger group of over 200 Venezuelan and Salvadoran individuals deported to El Salvador’s infamous mega-prison under the Trump administration’s policies. Officials allege these deportees have gang affiliations, thus justifying their removal. However, Mr. Garcia’s lawyer affirms that he has no gang affiliations, has never faced criminal charges, and is married to a US citizen.
Critically, Mr. Garcia was under a “withholding of removal” order, effectively prohibiting the US government from deporting him to El Salvador due to potential dangers he could face there. This order, granted in 2019, followed ICE’s initial detention and unproven allegations of Mr. Garcia’s involvement with the MS-13 gang, which he refuted. Immigration attorneys have verified that such withholding orders are common and represent an alternative form of protection similar to asylum.
Amelia Wilson, Director of the Immigration Justice Clinic at Pace University, stated, “It was an unlawful act for the US to return him to a country where he legally could not be sent.” Court records show that a judge granted Mr. Garcia the 2019 protection order after he “testified about his past experiences as a victim of gang violence in El Salvador during his youth and his subsequent flight to the US to escape this violence,” as detailed in a March 2025 affidavit by his wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura.
Department of Justice attorney Erez Reuveni confirmed the validity of the 2019 order, acknowledging that “the government did not appeal that decision, so it is final.” Despite this, the Trump administration has now reiterated unverified claims of Mr. Garcia’s MS-13 membership. Judge Xinis noted that the government presented this accusation “without any substantiating evidence” and failed to produce any formal deportation order or warrant.
Supreme Court to Decide on Deportation Case
The Trump administration is actively pursuing its arguments in the Supreme Court, potentially leading to a significant legal confrontation concerning the White House’s deportation strategies. Chief Justice John Roberts implemented a temporary administrative stay on Monday evening, halting the effectiveness of lower court rulings pending the Supreme Court’s review of the government’s appeal.
President Trump celebrated the stay on social media, asserting it as a triumph that enables his administration “to secure our Borders, and protect our families and our Country, itself.” Immigration lawyers are closely monitoring Mr. Garcia’s case, recognizing it as a critical test of the executive branch’s authority in immigration matters.
Ms. Wilson warned, “If the Trump administration seeks to remove individuals by circumventing immigration courts, it reveals a clear attempt to completely undermine judicial and due process.” The Supreme Court’s decision could have far-reaching implications for immigration enforcement and the rights of immigrants in the US.