Feds ask to keep Kilmar Abrego Garcia in jail pending trial
Feds ask to keep Kilmar Abrego Garcia in jail pending trial The detention request comes after Garcia was mistakenly deported to Salvador in March and then returned to face criminal charges in Tennessee.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Trump on the return of deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia
President Trump spoke with reporters on Air Force One on the return of deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
Acting U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire argued that Garcia is 'a serious risk' to flee or threaten witnesses in the case.
Justice Department lawyers contend Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran immigrant wrongfully deported to his home country and now returned to face criminal charges, should remain jailed while the case is argued.
U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw in Tennessee scheduled a detention hearing to consider the question on June 13.
Garcia is charged with conspiracy to transport undocumented immigrants and unlawful transportation for financial gain. He faces a maximum of 10 years in prison for each person transported, and the indictment unsealed last week charged him with driving a van with nine other people in it.
Acting U.S. Robert McGuire argued in a filing June 9 that one of the immigrants transported in the conspiracy was a minor, which would justify detention. Garcia 'is a serious risk' to flee or to threaten, injure or intimidate witnesses in the case, McGuire argued.
'It is not simply that he would face serious prison time,' McGuire said in the filing. 'It is that, if convicted, he would likely lose forever the opportunity to remain lawfully in the United States.'
'This motivation is substantially different from a citizen defendant who, while he may face prison time, does not face that permanent expulsion from a country where his family currently resides,' McGuire said.
Garcia was among hundreds of immigrants deported March 15 to a notorious Salvadoran prison as an alleged gang member, in his case MS-13.
Immigration officials acknowledged an 'administrative error' in removing him despite a court order preventing his deportation while he sought asylum in the U.S.
Garcia has denied being a member of MS-13. His lawyers have said he needs to meet with his Maryland family and lawyers to mount his defense, but that he has not gotten a fair trial in the court of public opinion.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration urges court not to dismiss case against Wisconsin judge
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Trump administration argued Monday that charges should not be dropped against a Wisconsin judge who was indicted for allegedly helping a man who is in the country evade U.S. immigration agents seeking to arrest him in her courthouse. Attorneys for the U.S. Department of Justice urged a federal judge to reject a motion filed by Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan seeking to dismiss the charges against her, saying doing so would be 'unprecedented" and allow judges to be above the law. Dugan faces a July 21 trial in the case that escalated a clash between Trump's administration and opponents over the Republican president's sweeping immigration crackdown. Trump critics contend that Dugan's arrest went too far and that the administration is trying to make an example out of her to discourage judicial opposition to the crackdown. The accusations against Dugan Dugan is charged with concealing an individual to prevent arrest, a misdemeanor, and obstruction, which is a felony. Prosecutors say she escorted Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, 31, and his lawyer out of her courtroom through a back door on April 18 after learning that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were in the courthouse seeking to arrest him for being in the country illegally. She could face up to six years in prison and a $350,000 fine if convicted on both counts. Her attorneys say she's innocent. They filed a motion last month to dismiss the case, saying she was acting in her official capacity as a judge and therefore is immune to prosecution. They also maintain that the federal government violated Wisconsin's sovereignty by disrupting a state courtroom and prosecuting a state judge. Trump administration response Justice Department attorneys responded in a court filing Monday, saying dismissing the charges against the judge on the grounds that she is immune would be unprecedented and would ignore 'well-established law that has long permitted judges to be prosecuted for crimes they commit.' 'Such a ruling would give state court judges carte blanche to interfere with valid law enforcement actions by federal agents in public hallways of a courthouse, and perhaps even beyond,' Justice Department attorneys argued. 'Dugan's desired ruling would, in essence, say that judges are 'above the law,' and uniquely entitled to interfere with federal law enforcement.' Dugan's attorney, Craig Mastantuono, did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment. In her motion to dismiss, Dugan argued that her conduct amounted to directing people's movement in and around her courtroom, and that she enjoys legal immunity for official acts she performs as a judge. She also accused the federal government of violating Wisconsin's sovereignty by disrupting a state courtroom and prosecuting a state judge. Dugan's case is similar to one brought during the first Trump administration against a Massachusetts judge, who was accused of helping a man sneak out a courthouse back door to evade a waiting immigration enforcement agent. That case was eventually dismissed. The case background According to prosecutors, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz illegally reentered the U.S. after being deported in 2013. He was charged in March with misdemeanor domestic violence in Milwaukee County and was in Dugan's courtroom for a hearing in that case on April 18. Dugan's clerk alerted her that immigration agents were in the courthouse looking to arrest Flores-Ruiz, prosecutors allege in court documents. According to an affidavit, Dugan became visibly angry at the agents' arrival and called the situation 'absurd.' After discussing the warrant for Flores-Ruiz's arrest with the agents, Dugan demanded that they speak with the chief judge and led them away from the courtroom. She then returned to the courtroom, was heard saying something to the effect of 'wait, come with me,' and then showed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out a back door, the affidavit says. The immigration agents eventually detained Flores-Ruiz outside the building following a foot chase. Dugan, 66, was arrested by the FBI on April 25 at the courthouse. A grand jury indicted Dugan on May 13 and she pleaded not guilty on May 15. Dugan defense fund A legal defense fund created by Dugan supporters to help pay for her high-profile defense attorneys has raised more than $137,000 in three weeks from more than 2,800 donors. Her legal team includes former U.S. Attorney Steve Biskupic and former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement. Both were appointed by Republican presidents. She has also hired prominent attorneys in Milwaukee and Madison. 'This is an impressive show of support for the defense fund, highlighting that the public believes in protecting a fair and independent judiciary,' former Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske, the fund's trustee, said Monday. 'The fund will continue to raise grassroots donations and uphold strict guidelines to ensure transparency and accountability.' Dugan is not required to list the donor names until she submits her annual financial disclosure form, which is due in April. Numerous people are prohibited from donating, including Milwaukee County residents; attorneys who practice in the county; lobbyists; judges; parties with pending matters before any Milwaukee County judge; and county employees.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Union leader faces federal charge of conspiracy to impede an officer during L.A. ICE raids
Federal authorities on Monday charged David Huerta, president of Service Employees International Union California, in a criminal complaint with conspiracy to impede an officer in connection with his alleged actions during an immigration enforcement raid last week. Huerta, 58, has been held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown L.A. since Friday and is expected to make his initial appearance in federal court on Monday afternoon. He is facing a felony charge that carries up to six years in federal prison, according to the U.S. attorney's office in L.A. His attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Huerta was detained and injured while documenting a workplace immigration raid in downtown L.A. on Friday. He was treated at a hospital and transferred to the Metropolitan Detention Center. Nine people tied to the protests have been charged federally, according to the U.S. attorney's office in L.A. Among them is Russell Gomez-Dzul, a Mexican national, who the White House said was arrested on suspicion of assaulting a federal officer. Rallies are scheduled in more than a dozen cities across the U.S., including in L.A., by union members and other supporters demanding Huerta's release and an end to the workplace immigration raids. California Democratic Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla sent a letter Monday to the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice demanding a review of Huerta's arrest. The U.S. attorney for Los Angeles, Bill Essayli, a staunch Trump ally and hard-line conservative who was appointed in April, last week posted a photo on X of Huerta, hands behind his back, after the arrest. Essayli accused Huerta of obstructing the access of federal authorities to a facility where they were conducting a search warrant. "Let me be clear: I don't care who you are — if you impede federal agents, you will be arrested and prosecuted," Essayli wrote on X. "No one has the right to assault, obstruct, or interfere with federal authorities carrying out their duties." The labor union said in a statement Friday that Huerta was detained 'while exercising his First Amendment right to observe and document law enforcement activity.' Schiff, who referred to Huerta as "a very prominent union leader in Los Angeles, a very respected voice," was waiting to attend the labor leader's hearing Monday. Schiff spoke with reporters in front of a building graffitied in expletives aimed at Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He said that Huerta was "exercising his lawful right to be present and observe these immigration raids." 'It's obviously a very traumatic thing, and now that it looks like the Justice Department wants to try and make an example out of him, it's all the more traumatic," Schiff said, when asked how Huerta was doing. "But this is part of the Trump playbook. They selectively use the Justice Department to go after their adversaries. It's what they do.' According to the criminal complaint, U.S. Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi authorized search warrants Thursday for four business locations 'suspected of unlawfully employing illegal aliens and falsifying employment records related to the status of its employees.' In an affidavit filed with the federal complaint, a supervisory special agent with Homeland Security Investigations, whose name was redacted, said news quickly spread about 'ICE raids' taking place throughout L.A. According to the complaint, Huerta arrived at Ambiance Apparel in the downtown Los Angeles Fashion District before noon Friday, joining several other protesters. The company was one of the sites of a workplace raid. 'The protesters, including HUERTA appeared to be communicating with each other in a concerted effort to disrupt the law enforcement operations,' the agent wrote. The agent wrote that Huerta was yelling at and taunting officers and later sat cross-legged in front of a vehicle gate to the location where law enforcement authorities were serving a search warrant. 'In addition to sitting in front of the gate, HUERTA at various times stood up and paced in front of the gate, effectively preventing law enforcement vehicles from entering or exiting the premises through the gate to execute the search warrant,' the agent wrote in the affidavit. 'As far as I was aware, this gate was the only location through which vehicles could enter or exit the premises.' The agent wrote that they told Huerta that, if he kept blocking the Ambiance gate, he would be arrested. Huerta responded that he couldn't hear the agent through his mask, according to the affidavit. Huerta used a curse word, the agent wrote. According to the complaint, as a white law enforcement van tried to get through the gate, Huerta stood in its path. Because Huerta 'was being uncooperative, the officer put his hands on HUERTA in an attempt to move him out of the path of the vehicle.' 'I saw HUERTA push back, and in response, the officer pushed HUERTA to the ground,' the agent wrote. 'The officer and I then handcuffed HUERTA and arrested him.' Huerta on Friday released a statement through his union, saying: 'What happened to me is not about me; This is about something much bigger. 'This is about how we as a community stand together and resist the injustice that's happening. Hard-working people, and members of our family and our community, are being treated like criminals. We all collectively have to object to this madness because this is not justice. This is injustice. And we all have to stand on the right side of justice." Ahead of the Monday afternoon hearing, Huerta's cousin, Marta Gonzales, said she was there to represent the family. 'We're all heartbroken. We have family all over the world,' she said. 'Everyone's been watching.' Gonzales called Huerta 'a giant in our family.' 'This is so unjust,' she said. Asked about the protests over the weekend, she said she wondered if Huerta 'was the spark for a lot of it. It just angered so many people." Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Criminal Case Against Kilmar Abrego Garcia Is Highly Suspect
On Friday, the Trump administration finally complied with multiple court orders to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the United States, securing his release from a prison in El Salvador. The catch: Federal officials promptly placed Abrego Garcia in criminal custody, unveiling an indictment alleging that he unlawfully smuggled migrants across the U.S. He will now be detained in Tennessee—far from his home and family in Maryland—awaiting trial on these charges. The indictment is, quite obviously, an effort by the White House to save face after losing its legal battle to keep Abrego Garcia imprisoned overseas. It has been nearly three months since the government deported him, due to its own 'administrative error,' in clear violation of a court order. And it has been almost two months since the Supreme Court ordered the government to 'facilitate' his return from the Salvadoran prison where he has been held. Although Abrego Garcia lacks permanent legal status in the U.S., he was protected against removal to his home country of El Salvador and denied due process during his expulsion, along with hundreds of other migrants to the notorious CECOT prison complex. (After his case garnered international attention, he was moved by Salvadoran authorities to a different prison.) Now, after repeatedly suggesting that it would defy SCOTUS, the Trump administration has finally complied, begrudgingly, by bringing Abrego Garcia back to the United States to face criminal prosecution. The charges against him may be valid. They may be exaggerated. Or they may be fabricated. It is far too soon to tell, and an indictment—which is notoriously easy to obtain—sheds little light on the matter. But already, there are at least five reasons to be skeptical that the government is acting in good faith and telling the truth about Abrego Garcia. First, it is unclear why the Trump administration waited so long to bring this indictment if the facts are as damning and undeniable as it claims. The White House has been desperately searching for ways to smear Abrego Garcia since it first deported him in March. It incessantly alleged that he was a known gang member without proffering any credible evidence; the White House's alleged 'proof' rested on the word of a disgraced former cop who later pleaded guilty to providing confidential information to a sex worker he had hired. The administration also accused Abrego Garcia of human trafficking because, in late 2022, he was pulled over while driving in a car with eight other Hispanic men. That episode now forms the basis of his indictment. But if that's true, why did federal prosecutors wait two and a half years to charge him? Second, and relatedly, the federal government took a very different view of the 2022 incident when it occurred. There was no overt evidence that Abrego Garcia was smuggling immigrants across the country, as prosecutors now claim. At the time, any inference of human trafficking rested entirely on circumstantial evidence and racial profiling. (A known construction worker, Abrego Garcia reported that he and his passengers were on their way to a construction site.) After pulling him over, Tennessee police reported Abrego Garcia and his passengers to federal law enforcement—but federal officers directed local police to let them continue along their way. The federal government did not see fit to even detain or investigate him then. Now it has brought felony charges against him. What changed—other than the president and his suddenly urgent desire to find a justification for his blatantly unlawful rendition program? Third, as Just Security's Ryan Goodman has noted, the government's account of the 2022 traffic stop has shifted as well. In their indictment and motion for pretrial detention, prosecutors claim that Abrego Garcia lied to officers during the encounter, concealing that he was driving his passengers up from Texas. That allegation lies at the heart of the case: It ostensibly confirms that Abrego Garcia was dishonest about his actions and intentions, giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that he was covering up criminal activity. The allegation, though, appears to be false. According to a 2022 Department of Homeland Security referral report, he was driving his passengers from Texas to Maryland for construction work. This report thus contradicts the government's new assertion that Abrego Garcia deceptively omitted the fact that his journey began in the Lone Star State. Fourth, prosecutors have now brought forth a raft of disturbing allegations about Abrego Garcia's behavior, accusing him of regularly smuggling guns, transporting migrants for cash, and attempting to solicit child pornography. But it has provided literally no supporting evidence for its claims about child pornography, or even the scantest details about this eye-popping accusation. Meanwhile, its allegations about human smuggling rest entirely on Abrego Garcia's alleged co-conspirators, who have since been imprisoned or deported. This kind of evidence is notoriously unreliable, in part because the government frequently offers deals—including payments, sentence reductions, or early release—to informants in exchange for inculpatory evidence. This practice incentivizes hyperbolic or made-up claims and disproportionately leads to wrongful conviction. Indeed, the Supreme Court recently took the rare step of overturning a capital conviction that rested on the dubious testimony of the defendant's alleged co-conspirator. The Trump administration's accusations should therefore be regarded with healthy suspicion. Finally, ABC News has reported that Ben Schrader, a high-ranking federal prosecutor in Tennessee, has resigned over his office's conduct in this case, fearing that Abrego Garcia was targeted for political reasons. Schrader's unusual move is a flashing red warning sign that something has gone terribly wrong in this case. There could be no clearer indication that the Trump administration is, indeed, persecuting Abrego Garcia as punishment for his efforts to fight his illegal deportation—a perverse attempt to ensure that, although he may have succeeded in returning to the U.S., his remaining time here will be spent behind bars. In 1940, shortly before his elevation to the Supreme Court, Robert Jackson issued a warning about the sweeping discretion of federal prosecutors. 'With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes,' Jackson explained, 'a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him.' This approach, Jackson warned, represents the 'greatest danger of abuse,' especially for those who happen to be 'unpopular' with the government. It is abundantly clear that in Abrego Garcia's case, the Trump administration started by 'picking the man,' then looking for the crime. That alone is cause for concern that this indictment represents a grievous abuse of the criminal justice system. The facts that come out at trial may or may not substantiate the charges. But at this point, the case bears so many hallmarks of a political prosecution that no one should assume that the government is speaking a word of truth.
