logo
Trump Administration Live Updates: President Says He Has No Desire to Mend Alliance With Musk

Trump Administration Live Updates: President Says He Has No Desire to Mend Alliance With Musk

New York Times11 hours ago

A protest in April at the U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, Md., during a hearing on the wrongful imprisonment of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia.
Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the man at the center of a political and legal maelstrom after he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, was flown back to the United States on Friday to face charges of transporting undocumented migrants.
The stunning move by the Trump administration, after months of fighting any effort to return him, could end the most high-profile court battle over President Trump's authority to rapidly seize and deport immigrants.
The decision to pull Mr. Abrego Garcia out of El Salvador and instead put him on trial in an American courtroom could provide an offramp for the Trump administration, which had bitterly opposed court orders requiring the government to take steps to return him after his wrongful removal in March.
The 10-page indictment — filed in Federal District Court in Nashville in May and unsealed Friday — might also be an effort to save face: Bringing Mr. Abrego Garcia back to face criminal charges may allow the White House to avoid a broader legal confrontation that was increasingly headed toward questions of whether Trump administration officials should be held in contempt of court.
'Abrego Garcia has landed in the United States to face justice,' Attorney General Pam Bondi said at a news conference in Washington. 'He was a smuggler of humans and children and women.'
She added, 'This is what American justice looks like.'
Two people familiar with the investigation said it made a significant leap forward when an imprisoned man recently came forward offering information about Mr. Abrego Garcia, but there was concern and disagreement among prosecutors about how to proceed. In recent weeks, a supervisor in the federal prosecutor's office in Nashville resigned over how the case was handled, these people said.
Ms. Bondi went on to level accusations against Mr. Abrego Garcia that were not included in the indictment, claiming that co-conspirators told investigators he had helped smuggle 'minor children' and gang members during dozens of trips around the country. She linked him to more serious crimes, including murders and the abuse of women — even though he has only been charged in connection with smuggling.
She also claimed, without providing evidence, that his seemingly law-abiding life in Maryland as a contractor, father and husband was a cover for a criminal activities spanning nine years. Ms. Bondi, who spearheaded the administration's public relations campaign to discredit him during the court battle, predicted he would be convicted and returned to El Salvador for imprisonment.
The attorney general declined to say when the Tennessee investigation into Mr. Abrego Garcia was opened. His indictment was filed more than two weeks ago, on May 21, and unsealed Friday after he arrived in the United States.
The deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, said he believed the indictment was likely to render moot the lawsuit brought by Mr. Abrego Garcia's family to force his release from Salvadoran custody.
Mr. Abrego Garcia made an initial appearance in federal court in Nashville later Friday, and the government moved to hold him in custody. He was detained in Putnam County jail outside the city and is expected to return to court on June 13.
Asked whether he had spoken directly with President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador to take steps to free Mr. Abrego Garcia, Mr. Trump demurred. 'I don't want to say that. But he's returned,' he said, adding: 'And he should have never had to be returned. You take a look at what's happened with him; you take a look at what they found in the grand jury and everywhere else.'
Mr. Bukele, who had previously said he would not release Mr. Abrego Garcia, said on social media on Friday, 'We work with the Trump administration, and if they request the return of a gang member to face charges, of course we wouldn't refuse.'
Mr. Abrego Garcia's lawyers said they welcomed their day in court and pointed out that the government's decision to return him to the United States undercut its longstanding efforts to keep him in El Salvador.
'Today's action proves what we've known all along — that the administration had the ability to bring him back and just refused to do so,' said Andrew Rossman, a lawyer for Mr. Abrego Garcia. 'It's now up to our judicial system to see that Mr. Abrego Garcia receives the due process that the Constitution guarantees to all persons.'
Ama Frimpong, the legal director for CASA, an immigrant rights group based in Maryland, described the mixed feelings of Mr. Abrego Garcia's wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura. She 'is of course very happy that her husband is back on U.S. soil, at least as far as we know,' Ms. Frimpong said, 'but of course, under very egregious and horrendous circumstances.'
Even though the Trump administration has repeatedly accused Mr. Abrego Garcia of belonging to MS-13 — which has been designated as a terrorist organization — a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled in April that the defendant had been deprived of his rights by being wrongly deported.
'The government asserts that Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS-13,' the panel wrote. 'Perhaps, but perhaps not. Regardless, he is still entitled to due process.'
Since the start of the case, administration officials have sought to depict Mr. Abrego Garcia, a metal worker who has lived illegally in the United States without criminal charges for years, as a member of MS-13. The charges filed against him on Friday accused him of belonging to the gang and taking part in a conspiracy to 'transport thousands of undocumented aliens' across the United States.
In court papers seeking his pretrial detention, prosecutors said Mr. Abrego Garcia had been part of a trafficking conspiracy and had played 'a significant role' in smuggling immigrants, including unaccompanied minors.
If convicted, Mr. Abrego Garcia could face a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison for each person he transported, the papers said, a penalty that would go 'well beyond the remainder of the defendant's life.'
Mr. Abrego Garcia had been in Salvadoran custody since March 15, when he was flown, along with scores of other migrants, into the hands of jailers at the so-called Terrorism Confinement Center, a notorious prison known as CECOT. He was later moved to another facility in El Salvador.
For nearly three months, his lawyers have been trying every legal strategy to enforce court orders demanding that the Trump administration 'facilitate' his release from El Salvador.
From the beginning of the case, officials have acknowledged that Mr. Abrego Garcia was wrongfully expelled to El Salvador in violation of a previous court order that expressly barred him being sent to the country. But the Justice Department, acting on behalf of the White House and the Department of Homeland Security, has not given an inch beyond that admission, saying only that if Mr. Abrego Garcia presented himself at the U.S. border, officials would 'facilitate' his re-entry to the country.
Department lawyers have also spent weeks stonewalling an effort by Judge Paula Xinis, who is overseeing the case, to get answers to the question of what the White House has done, and planned to do, to seek Mr. Abrego Garcia's freedom. The administration's serial refusals to respond to inquiries about its own behavior in the case has so annoyed Judge Xinis that this week she allowed Mr. Abrego Garcia's lawyers to seek penalties against the government.
According to the indictment, the case against Mr. Abrego Garcia dated to Nov. 30, 2022, when he was stopped for speeding by the Tennessee Highway Patrol on Interstate 40 East, in Putnam County. Officers determined that the Chevrolet Suburban he was driving had been altered with 'an aftermarket third row of seats designed to carry additional passengers,' the indictment said.
It also noted that there were 'nine Hispanic males packed into the S.U.V.'
Mr. Abrego Garcia told the officers that he and his passengers had been in St. Louis for the past two weeks doing construction work, according to the indictment. But a subsequent investigation, prosecutors said, revealed that Mr. Abrego Garcia's cellphone and license plate reader data showed that he had been in Texas that morning and nowhere near St. Louis for the past weeks.
Moreover, the indictment said, none of the people in the vehicle 'had luggage or even tools consistent with construction work.'
Prosecutors said that the traffic stop in Tennessee was not the first time that Mr. Abrego Garcia had engaged in alleged immigrant smuggling, which they said was his 'primary source of income.' They added that he had transported about '50 undocumented aliens' a month across the country for several years.
Jazmine Ulloa and Annie Correal contributed reporting.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What to know about Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests
What to know about Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests

Washington Post

time26 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

What to know about Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests

President Donald Trump says he's deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to respond to immigration protests , over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. It's not the first time Trump has activated the National Guard to quell protests. In 2020, he asked governors of several states to send troops to Washington, D.C. to respond to demonstrations that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors he asked agreed, sending troops to the federal district. The governors that refused the request were allowed to do so, keeping their troops on home soil. This time, however, Trump is acting in opposition to Newsom, who under normal circumstances would retain control and command of California's National Guard. While Trump said that federalizing the troops was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California, the Democratic governor said the move was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' Here are some things to know about when and how the president can deploy troops on U.S. soil. Generally, federal military forces are not allowed to carry out civilian law enforcement duties against U.S. citizens except in times of emergency. An 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. But Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act on Saturday. Instead, he relied on a similar federal law that allows the president to federalize National Guard troops under certain circumstances. The National Guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests. Often it operates under state command and control, using state funding. Sometimes National Guard troops will be assigned by their state to serve federal missions, remaining under state command but using federal funding. The law cited by Trump's proclamation places National Guard troops under federal command. The law says that can be done under three circumstances: When the U.S. is invaded or in danger of invasion; when there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government, or when the President is unable to 'execute the laws of the United States,' with regular forces. But the law also says that orders for those purposes 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.' It's not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state's governor. Notably, Trump's proclamation says the National Guard troops will play a supporting role by protecting ICE officers as they enforce the law, rather than having the troops perform law enforcement work. Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in military justice and national security law, says that's because the National Guard troops can't legally engage in ordinary law enforcement activities unless Trump first invokes the Insurrection Act. Vladeck said the move raises the risk that the troops could end up using force while filling that 'protection' role. The move could also be a precursor to other, more aggressive troop deployments down the road, he wrote on his website . 'There's nothing these troops will be allowed to do that, for example, the ICE officers against whom these protests have been directed could not do themselves,' Vladeck wrote. The Insurrection Act and related laws were used during the Civil Rights era to protect activists and students desegregating schools. President Dwight Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. National Guard troops have been deployed for a variety of emergencies, including the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. But generally, those deployments are carried out with the agreements of the governors of the responding states. In 2020, Trump asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. to quell protests that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors agreed, sending troops to the federal district. At the time, Trump also threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act for protests following Floyd's death in Minneapolis – an intervention rarely seen in modern American history. But then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back , saying the law should be invoked 'only in the most urgent and dire of situations.' Trump never did invoke the Insurrection Act during his first term. But while campaigning for his second term, he suggested that would change. Trump told an audience in Iowa in 2023 that he was prevented from using the military to suppress violence in cities and states during his first term, and said if the issue came up again in his next term, 'I'm not waiting.' Trump also promised to deploy the National Guard to help carry out his immigration enforcement goals , and his top adviser Stephen Miller explained how that would be carried out: Troops under sympathetic Republican governors would send troops to nearby states that refuse to participate, Miller said on 'The Charlie Kirk Show,' in 2023. After Trump announced he was federalizing the National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow. Hegseth wrote on the social media platform X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and would also be mobilized 'if violence continues.'

Former NFL player Kelvin Joseph facing charges after crash that killed motorcyclist
Former NFL player Kelvin Joseph facing charges after crash that killed motorcyclist

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Former NFL player Kelvin Joseph facing charges after crash that killed motorcyclist

DALLAS (AP) — Former NFL player Kelvin Joseph is facing charges for his involvement in a crash that killed a female motorcyclist on a Dallas-area freeway, The Dallas Morning News reported. Police in the Dallas suburb of Richardson said on social media that Joseph, who has been playing in the United Football League this spring, called police in Plano, another Dallas suburb, to report his involvement in the predawn crash Saturday. Advertisement The 25-year-old Joseph, who was driving a BMW, was arrested on charges of driving while intoxicated, a misdemeanor, and collision involving personal injury or death, a second-degree felony. Police said 27-year-old Cody Morris of Plano was killed in the crash. Joseph was drafted by the Cowboys in 2021 and spent two seasons with them before he was traded to Miami. He also played briefly for Seattle and Indianapolis. The cornerback has been playing for the DC Defenders, who were set to play in a UFL conference championship game Sunday. The UFL said in a statement sent to Dallas TV station WFAA that it was aware of Joseph's arrest but declined further comment. During the 2022 offseason with the Cowboys, Joseph was the passenger in an SUV from which two people fired shots into a group of men in Dallas, fatally striking one of the men in the head. Police concluded Joseph wasn't the shooter, and the NFL didn't suspend him. Advertisement An attorney who previously represented Joseph didn't return a phone call from The Dallas Morning News. It wasn't immediately clear whether Joseph had an attorney following his arrest Saturday. ___ AP NFL:

South Dakota is on track to spend $2 billion on prisons in the next decade
South Dakota is on track to spend $2 billion on prisons in the next decade

Yahoo

time33 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

South Dakota is on track to spend $2 billion on prisons in the next decade

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — Two years after approving a tough-on-crime sentencing law, South Dakota is scrambling to deal with the price tag for that legislation: Housing thousands of additional inmates could require up to $2 billion to build new prisons in the next decade. That's a lot of money for a state with one of the lowest populations in the U.S., but a consultant said it's needed to keep pace with an anticipated 34% surge of new inmates in the next decade as a result of South Dakota's tough criminal justice laws. And while officials are grumbling about the cost, they don't seem concerned with the laws that are driving the need even as national crime rates are dropping. 'Crime has been falling everywhere in the country, with historic drops in crime in the last year or two,' said Bob Libal, senior campaign strategist at the criminal justice nonprofit The Sentencing Project. 'It's a particularly unusual time to be investing $2 billion in prisons.' Some Democratic-led states have worked to close prisons and enact changes to lower inmate populations, but that's a tough sell in Republican-majority states such as South Dakota that believe in a tough-on-crime approach, even if that leads to more inmates. The South Dakota State Penitentiary For now, state lawmakers have set aside a $600 million fund to replace the overcrowded 144-year-old South Dakota State Penitentiary in Sioux Falls, making it one of the most expensive taxpayer-funded projects in South Dakota history. But South Dakota will likely need more prisons. Phoenix-based Arrington Watkins Architects, which the state hired as a consultant, has said South Dakota will need 3,300 additional beds in coming years, bringing the cost to $2 billion. Driving up costs is the need for facilities with different security levels to accommodate the inmate population. Concerns about South Dakota's prisons first arose four years ago, when the state was flush with COVID-19 relief funds. Lawmakers wanted to replace the penitentiary, but they couldn't agree on where to put the prison and how big it should be. A task force of state lawmakers assembled by Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden is expected to decide that in a plan for prison facilities this July. Many lawmakers have questioned the proposed cost, but few have called for criminal justice changes that would make such a large prison unnecessary. 'One thing I'm trying to do as the chairman of this task force is keep us very focused on our mission,' said Lieutenant Gov. Tony Venhuizen. 'There are people who want to talk about policies in the prisons or the administration or the criminal justice system more broadly, and that would be a much larger project than the fairly narrow scope that we have.' South Dakota's laws mean more people are in prison South Dakota's incarceration rate of 370 per 100,000 people is an outlier in the Upper Midwest. Neighbors Minnesota and North Dakota have rates of under 250 per 100,000 people, according to the Sentencing Project, a criminal justice advocacy nonprofit. Nearly half of South Dakota's projected inmate population growth can be attributed to a law approved in 2023 that requires some violent offenders to serve the full-length of their sentences before parole, according to a report by Arrington Watkins. When South Dakota inmates are paroled, about 40% are ordered to return to prison, the majority of those due to technical violations such as failing a drug test or missing a meeting with a parole officer. Those returning inmates made up nearly half of prison admissions in 2024. Sioux Falls criminal justice attorney Ryan Kolbeck blamed the high number of parolees returning in part on the lack of services in prison for people with drug addictions. 'People are being sent to the penitentiary but there's no programs there for them. There's no way it's going to help them become better people,' he said. 'Essentially we're going to put them out there and house them for a little bit, leave them on parole and expect them to do well.' South Dakota also has the second-greatest disparity of Native Americans in its prisons. While Native Americans make up one-tenth of South Dakota's population, they make up 35% of those in state prisons, according to Prison Policy Initiative, a nonprofit public policy group. Though legislators in the state capital, Pierre, have been talking about prison overcrowding for years, they're reluctant to dial back on tough-on-crime laws. For example, it took repeated efforts over six years before South Dakota reduced a controlled substance ingestion law to a misdemeanor from a felony for the first offense, aligning with all other states. 'It was a huge, Herculean task to get ingestion to be a misdemeanor,' Kolbeck said. Former penitentiary warden Darin Young said the state needs to upgrade its prisons, but he also thinks it should spend up to $300 million on addiction and mental illness treatment. 'Until we fix the reasons why people come to prison and address that issue, the numbers are not going to stop,' he said. Without policy changes, the new prisons are sure to fill up, criminal justice experts agreed. 'We might be good for a few years, now that we've got more capacity, but in a couple years it'll be full again,' Kolbeck said. 'Under our policies, you're going to reach capacity again soon.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store