A federal judge Xinis has issued a stern warning to the Trump administration over its failure to act on the wrongful deportation of Kilmar Ábrego García, a 29-year-old Salvadoran national. Judge Xinis of the U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, Maryland, blasted government officials for what she described as a blatant lack of initiative to comply with a Supreme Court order demanding efforts to return Mr. Ábrego García to the United States.
“To date, what the record shows is that nothing has been done. Nothing,” Judge Xinis told Justice Department attorneys during a tense court hearing on Tuesday. She emphasized the urgency of the situation, instructing officials to “cancel vacations, cancel other appointments,” and ordered the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to provide sworn testimony by April 23.
Judge Xinis accused the government of potential gamesmanship and made it clear that she would not hesitate to hold the administration in contempt of court if they failed to demonstrate good faith. She has also demanded daily updates from the government on what steps are being taken to facilitate Mr. Ábrego García’s return.
Supreme Court Labels Deportation “Illegal”
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled last Friday that Mr. Ábrego García’s deportation was unlawful, citing the government’s own admission that he was legally protected from removal due to a 2019 court order. That order had shielded him from deportation on grounds that he could face persecution from gangs in El Salvador.
Despite the ruling, the Trump administration has stalled, raising questions about the separation of powers and executive defiance. The deportation, which occurred on March 15, was initially attributed to an “administrative error” by a now-suspended Justice Department attorney. But White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller downplayed the issue, claiming, “Nobody was mistakenly deported anywhere.”
The Trump administration continues to argue that Judge Xinis has overstepped her authority by ordering the executive branch to “effectuate” Mr. Ábrego García’s return—an action they say infringes on the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy.
Legal Limbo and Conflicting Messages from the Government
The legal status of Mr. Ábrego García remains uncertain, as conflicting statements from various government agencies have further muddied the waters. Justice Department lawyer Drew Ensign said on Tuesday that the government would permit Mr. Ábrego García to re-enter the U.S. if he presented himself at a port of entry. But a DHS filing contradicted that claim, indicating he would be detained and potentially removed to a third country upon arrival.
The filing, submitted by acting general counsel Joseph Mazzarra, also stated the department may petition an immigration judge to rescind the deportation protections granted to Mr. Ábrego García six years ago. This has alarmed his legal team, which argues that such actions would compound an already unlawful deportation.
Mr. Ábrego García is one of more than 200 individuals deported from the U.S. to El Salvador in March, many of whom were labeled by Trump officials as alleged MS-13 gang members. However, his attorneys strongly deny any gang affiliation and emphasize that he has never been charged with a crime in the U.S. or abroad.
Family, Lawmakers Call for Urgent Repatriation
Outside the courthouse, Mr. Ábrego García’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, issued an emotional plea for his safe return, decrying the politicization of his case. “I find myself pleading with the Trump administration and the Bukele administration to stop playing political games with the life of Kilmar,” she told demonstrators.
Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland has also stepped in, announcing plans to visit El Salvador to check on Mr. Ábrego García’s wellbeing. The Democratic senator said he hopes to meet with Salvadoran officials and advocate for his release, calling the situation “deeply troubling” and “a human rights concern.”
Meanwhile, El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, who recently visited the White House, said he lacks the authority to return Mr. Ábrego García to the U.S., further complicating efforts to resolve the matter diplomatically.
Judge Xinis Contempt Ruling Could Escalate Constitutional Clash
Judge Xinis’s contempt warning could lead to a significant constitutional confrontation between the judiciary and the executive branch. If the court finds that the Trump administration deliberately defied judicial authority, it could set a major precedent regarding checks and balances.
A ruling of contempt would underscore the judiciary’s resolve to enforce lawful orders, even when they challenge presidential authority. On the other hand, administration officials have hinted that such judicial actions may themselves be unconstitutional, arguing that Judge Xinis is interfering with foreign affairs—a domain traditionally reserved for the executive.
As the April 23 deadline approaches, all eyes are on the federal government’s next steps. With daily reporting now mandated, and with the credibility of multiple institutions on the line, this case may prove to be a landmark moment in the legal and political struggles over immigration policy and executive accountability.
