Abrego Garcia's lawyers ask Maryland judge to fine Trump administration for contempt
Lawyers for Kilmar Abrego Garcia have asked a federal judge in Maryland to impose fines against the Trump administration for contempt, arguing that it flagrantly ignored court orders for several weeks to return him to the U.S. from El Salvador.
Abrego Garcia's attorneys said the administration claimed to be powerless to retrieve him, even while it secretly built a human smuggling case against him. The U.S. brought Abrego Garcia to a federal court in Nashville, Tennessee, last week to face those charges.
"The Government's defiance has not been subtle," the attorneys said in a filing late Wednesday. "It has been vocal and sustained and flagrant."
Request to force the release of federal documents
The attorneys are also asking U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis to compel the release of documents the federal government withheld by claiming they contain protected state secrets. Or as an alternative, the lawyers suggested a special master to investigate the government's "willful noncompliance" of court orders.
"What the Government improperly seeks to hide must be exposed for all to see," Abrego Garcia's attorneys wrote.
Their request came a day after the Trump administration said it will ask Xinis to dismiss the case, with U.S. attorneys describing recent accusations by Abrego Garcia's attorneys as baseless, desperate and disappointing.
"But the proof is in the pudding — Defendants have returned Abrego Garcia to the United States just as they were ordered to do," they wrote.
Contempt was possible, legal experts said
Legal experts said last month that the Abrego Garcia case may be headed for contempt. And the request by his attorneys adds to the ongoing friction between the White House and the courts during President Donald Trump's second term.
Courts can hold parties to civil litigation or criminal cases in contempt for disobeying their orders. The penalty can take the form of fines or other civil punishments, or even prosecution and jail time, if pursued criminally. But contempt processes are slow and deliberative, and, when the government's involved, there's usually a resolution before penalties kick in.
How the Abrego Garcia case got to this point
The U.S. mistakenly deported Abrego Garcia to an El Salvador prison in March. The expulsion violated a U.S. immigration judge's order in 2019 that shielded him from deportation to his native country because he likely faced gang persecution there.
Abrego Garcia's American wife sued, prompting Xinis to order his return on April 4. The Supreme Court ruled April 10 that the administration must work to bring him back.
Arguments ensued over the next several weeks about whether the Trump administration was following those orders or not. Trump also said publicly that he could return Abrego Garcia to the U.S. with a call to El Salvador President Nayib Bukele.
Xinis ordered U.S. attorneys to submit documents and testimony to show what the government had done to follow her orders. The Trump administration claimed that much of that information is protected under the state secrets privilege. The judge has not ruled on that matter.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Judge Blocks Trump Admin From Deploying National Guard in Los Angeles
As California Governor Newsom and President Trump continue to square off over the administration's militarized response to anti-deportation protests in Los Angeles, a federal judge has blocked the activation of National Guard troops in the city. Judge Charles Breyer ordered the Trump administration to return control of the guard to Newsom, saying the president had acted illegally in federalizing 4,000 guard troops against the governor's wishes. More from Variety PBS, NPR Could Lose $1.1 Billion in Funding After Trump's Rescission Bill Narrowly Passes House The Chrisleys Claimed Political Persecution to Get a Trump Pardon, but Records Tell a Different Story Bob Costas Slams Trump's 'Ongoing Assaults' on Free Press and Warns Against 'MAGA Media': 'Democracy As We Know It Is Under Attack' 'The Court concludes that Plaintiffs have demonstrated that the balance of equities tips in their favor and that an injunction restraining the President's use of military force in Los Angeles is in the public interest,' Breyer wrote. Protests have lasted nearly a week in Los Angeles following a series of raids conducted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement around Southern California. Trump declared on June 7 that the protesters were engaged in 'rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States,' and called out the guard. The ruling cites several dictionary definitions of 'rebellion' and concludes that the protests — including sporadic acts of violence — does not qualify. 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' Breyer wrote. The order does not goes into effect until 12 p.m. PT on Friday; the Trump administration is expected to seek an appeal beforehand. The ruling came hours after Sen. Alex Padilla was forcibly removed from a press conference in Los Angeles, taken to the ground, and put in handcuffs. The moment became an instant media firestorm, leading news sites, playing on cable news all day, and bringing condemnation from Democrats on the Senate floor. In an interview Thursday evening on MSNBC's 'The Beat with Ari Melber,' Padilla said he was listening to a press conference from Kristi Noem, the secretary of homeland security, when 'the political rhetoric got to be too much.' 'At one point, it was just too much to take,' Padilla said in his first interview about the encounter. 'Not the first, but the second attack on the political leadership of California and this notion that Donald Trump and Kristi Noem have to come in and rescue the people of Los Angeles from Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass? It was too much. And so I spoke up.' Noem appeared at the FBI building in Westwood to vow to continue to crack down on the protests. 'We are not going away,' Noem said. 'We are staying here to liberate this city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and this mayor have placed on this country.' That was the point at which the senator reacted, moving toward the front of the room and raising his voice to ask a question. The agents apparently did not recognize Padilla — the lesser known of California's two senators — and grabbed him. He identified himself as he was pushed backwards and out of the room. 'To suggest that they have to come into Los Angeles to restore order — ' he told interviewer Jacob Soboroff. 'You know Los Angeles. It's a big, spread-out city. The images that we've seen over the course of the last week of some vandalism, some violence, et cetera, that's wrong. And I denounce it. But it's very small and very contained in a big metropolis of the Los Angeles area. So the National Guard was not necessary.' He said he did talk with Noem afterward, but never got a scheduled briefing on the federal response. 'If they're allowed to do this in Los Angeles, they can and they will do this in any corner of the country,' Padilla said. Best of Variety New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week 'Harry Potter' TV Show Cast Guide: Who's Who in Hogwarts? 25 Hollywood Legends Who Deserve an Honorary Oscar
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Military Parade: Cost, Equipment and What to Expect
In celebration of the Army's 250th Birthday, the largest U.S. military parade in decades is scheduled for Flag Day—also President Trump's 79th birthday. Sign in to access your portfolio
CNA
a day ago
- CNA
Sean 'Diddy' Combs' lawyer complains about trial secrecy as a famous rapper's name goes unmentioned
A lawyer for Sean 'Diddy' Combs protested the rising tide of secrecy at the hip-hop icon's federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial on Thursday (Jun 12) after Combs and the public were excluded from arguments over whether another famous rapper's name could be disclosed. Defence attorney Marc Agnifilo complained to Judge Arun Subramanian after Combs was excluded from a meeting outside the courtroom between lawyers and the judge. That meeting delayed the final day of weeklong testimony from a woman identified in court only by the pseudonym 'Jane', who dated Combs from 2001 until his September arrest. When her emotional testimony ended, she hugged a prosecutor, Maureen Comey, in front of the jury, which would have drawn an outcry from the defence except she hugged defence attorney Teny Geragos too. Her testimony likely helped both sides. She admitted still loving Combs, but she said she now resents that she felt forced to have sex with strangers to satisfy his sexual fantasies. Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty to charges that carry a potential prison sentence of 15 years to life in prison. Prosecutors say he used fame, fortune, violence and threats to manipulate girlfriends into sex with paid sex workers in multi-day events that they later regretted. Defence attorneys say the government is prosecuting consensual sex between adults. Under cross-examination by Geragos, Jane testified Thursday that she flew to Las Vegas in January 2023 with a famous rapper and his girlfriend. Geragos didn't identify the rapper but asked Jane if he had recorded with Combs, 'an individual at the top of the music industry as well ... an icon in the music industry'. She also asked if Combs and the rapper were 'really close'. 'Yes,' Jane replied. Once in Las Vegas, Jane testified, she went with a group including the rapper to dinner, a strip club and a hotel room party, where a sex worker had sex with a woman while a half-dozen others watched. She said there was dancing and the rapper said, 'hey beautiful', and told her he'd always wanted to have sex with her. Jane said she didn't recall exactly when but she flashed her breasts while dancing. The testimony followed the closed-door session Thursday, when lawyers discussed what facts could be disclosed about the hotel room encounter. Agnifilo said the need for a public trial was 'an important issue, a constitutional issue' and objected to so much happening out of the earshot of his client. In response, the judge offered more secrecy, saying 'If your client wishes to be heard ... we can clear this courtroom if need be to address it.' Agnifilo rejected the offer. 'Part of the reason trials are fully public is so if other people realise they know something about an event discussed in a public courtroom, they can come forward and share their recollection of it,' the lawyer said, adding: 'That is kind of the practical side of the constitutional right to a public trial.' A monitor that is used to show exhibits to spectators has been shut off throughout Jane's testimony, although lawyers, the judge, Combs and jurors can view them. Some sidebar conversations between lawyers and the judge have been sealed. The judge also has banned the public from viewing any exhibits containing sexual content, even though the defence has said images from the group sex episodes proves they were consensual acts between adults, and not proof of crimes. And many of the letters to the judge from lawyers each day are filed under seal, preventing the public from quickly knowing, for instance, the details about why prosecutors want a black juror ejected from the jury in mid-trial. The judge has said he'll decide the juror's fate Friday. Defence attorney Alexandra Shapiro has called the prosecution's quest a 'thinly veiled effort to dismiss a black juror'. Jane and Casandra 'Cassie' Ventura, who testified for four days in the trial's first week about her relationship with Combs from 2007 through 2018, both said they participated in the sex marathons for years, with Cassie calling them 'freak-off' nights and Jane referring to them as 'hotel nights'. Agnifilo said the defence consented to Jane testifying with a pseudonym but did not consent to other events related to her testimony and the testimony of other witnesses not being public.
