Prosecutors tell judge government plans to deport Abrego Garcia to a country that's not El Salvador
Federal prosecutors told a judge on Thursday that the government plans to initiate removal proceedings against Kilmar Abrego Garcia and to deport him to a country that is not El Salvador upon his release from a Tennessee jail.
But the prosecutors also said that they would comply with all court orders and that their plans are not imminent.
Attorneys for Abrego Garcia earlier asked a federal judge in Maryland to order his return to that state when he is released from jail in Tennessee, an arrangement that would prevent likely attempts by immigration officials to quickly deport Abrego Garcia.
The Maryland construction worker became a flashpoint over President Donald Trump's immigration policies after he was mistakenly deported to his native El Salvador in March. He's been in jail in Tennessee since he was returned to the U.S. on June 7 to face federal charges of human smuggling.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes in Nashville has ruled that Abrego Garcia has a right to be released while awaiting trial. But she decided Wednesday to keep him in custody for at least a few more days over concerns that U.S. immigration officials would swiftly try to deport him again.
Abrego Garcia's attorneys in Maryland, where his wife is suing the Trump administration over his March deportation, have offered up a possible solution. They've asked the federal judge overseeing the lawsuit to direct the government to bring him to Maryland while he awaits trial in Tennessee.
'If this Court does not act swiftly, then the Government is likely to whisk Abrego Garcia away to some place far from Maryland,' Abrego Garcia's attorneys wrote in their request to U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Greenbelt.
Abrego Garcia lived in Maryland, just outside Washington, with his American wife and children for more than a decade. His deportation violated a U.S. immigration judge's order in 2019 that barred his expulsion to his native country. The judge had found that Abrego Garcia faced a credible threat from gangs who had terrorized him and his family.
The Trump administration described its violation of the immigration judge's 2019 order as an administrative error. Trump and other officials doubled down on claims Abrego Garcia was in the MS-13 gang, an accusation that Abrego Garcia denies.
Abrego Garcia pleaded not guilty on June 13 to smuggling charges that his attorneys have characterized as an attempt to justify his mistaken expulsion to a notorious prison in El Salvador.
Those charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop for speeding in Tennessee, during which Abrego Garcia was driving a vehicle with nine passengers without luggage.
Holmes, the magistrate judge in Tennessee, wrote in a ruling on Sunday that federal prosecutors failed to show that Abrego Garcia was a flight risk or a danger to the community.
During a court hearing on Wednesday, Holmes set specific conditions for his release that included Abrego Garcia living with his brother, a U.S. citizen, in Maryland. But she held off on releasing him over concerns that prosecutors can't prevent U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from deporting him.
Holmes expressed doubts about her own power to require anything more than prosecutors using their best efforts to secure the cooperation of ICE.
'I have no reservations about my ability to direct the local U.S. Attorney's office,' the judge said. 'I don't think I have any authority over ICE.'
Acting U.S. Attorney Rob McGuire told the judge he would do 'the best I can' to secure the cooperation of ICE. But the prosecutor noted, 'That's a separate agency with separate leadership and separate directions. I will coordinate, but I can't tell them what to do.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
36 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Rural schools feel the pinch from Trump administration's cuts to mental health grants
WASHINGTON (AP) — In parts of rural upstate New York, schools have more than 1,100 students for every mental health provider. In a far-flung region with little public transportation, those few school counselors often are the only mental health professionals available to students. Hennessey Lustica has been overseeing grant-funded efforts to train and hire more school psychologists, counselors and social workers in the Finger Lakes region, but those efforts may soon come to end — a casualty of the Trump administration's decision to cancel school mental health grants around the country. 'Cutting this funding is just going to devastate kids,' said Lustica, project director of the Wellness Workforce Collaborative in the Seneca Falls Central School District. 'The workforce that we're developing, just in my 21 school districts it's over 20,000 kids that are going to be impacted by this and not have the mental health support that they need.' The $1 billion in grants for school-based mental health programs were part of a sweeping gun violence bill signed by President Joe Biden in 2022 in response to the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. The grants were meant to help schools hire more psychologists, counselors and other mental health workers, especially in rural areas. Under the Biden administration, the department prioritized applicants who showed how they would increase the number of providers from diverse backgrounds, or from communities directly served by the school district. But President Donald Trump's administration took issue with aspects of the grant programs that touched on race , saying they were harmful to students. 'We owe it to American families to ensure that taxpayer dollars are supporting evidence-based practices that are truly focused on improving students' mental health,' Education Department spokesperson Madi Biedermann said. School districts around the US cut off training and retention programs Lustica learned of her grant's cancellation in April in a two-page letter from the Education Department, which said the government found that her work violated civil rights law. It did not specify how. Lustica is planning to appeal the decision. She rejected the letter's characterization of her work, saying she and her colleagues abide by a code of ethics that honors each person's individuality, regardless of race, gender or identity. 'The rhetoric is just false,' Lustica said. 'I don't know how else to say it. I think if you looked at these programs and looked at the impact that these programs have in our rural school districts, and the stories that kids will tell you about the mental health professionals that are in their schools, it has helped them because of this program.' The grants supported programs in districts across the country. In California, West Contra Costa Unified School District will lose nearly $4 million in funding. In Alabama, Birmingham City Schools was notified it would not receive the rest of a $15 million grant it was using to train, hire and retain mental health staff. In Wisconsin, the state's Department of Public Instruction will lose $8 million allocated for the next four years. The state had used the money to boost retention and expand programs to encourage high schoolers to pursue careers in school-based mental health. 'At a time when communities are urgently asking for help serving mental health needs, this decision is indefensible,' state superintendent Jill Underly said in a statement. In recent House and Senate hearings, Democrats pressed Education Secretary Linda McMahon on the end of the grants and the impact on students. McMahon told them mental health is a priority and the grants would be rebid and reissued. 'Anyone who works or spends time with kids knows these grants were funding desperately needed access to mental health care services,' American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten said in a statement. 'Canceling the funding now is a cruel, reckless act that puts millions of children at risk.' Grant programs put more mental health specialists in schools The strains on youth mental health are acute in many rural school districts. In one upstate New York district, half the students have had to move due to economic hardship in the last five years, creating instability that can affect their mental health, Lustica said. In a survey of students from sixth through 12th grade in one county, nearly half reported feeling sad or depressed most of the time; one in three said their lives lacked clear purpose or meaning. 'We've got huge amounts of depression, huge amounts of anxiety, lots of trauma and not enough providers,' Lustica said. 'School is the place where kids are getting a lot of the services they need.' Some families in the region are unable to afford private counseling or are unable to get their children to appointments given transportation challenges, said Danielle Legg, a graduate student who did an internship as a school social worker with funding from the grant program. 'Their access to mental health care truly is limited to when they're in school and there's a provider there that can see them, and it's vital,' Legg said. In the past three years, 176 students completed their mental health training through the program Lustica oversees, and 85% of them were hired into shortage areas, she said. The program that offered training to graduate students at schools helped address staffing needs and inspired many to pursue careers in educational settings, said Susan McGowan, a school social worker who supervised graduate students in Geneva City School District. 'It just feels, to me, really catastrophic,' McGowan said of the grant cancellation. 'These positions are difficult to fill, so when you get grad students who are willing to work hand in hand with other professionals in their building, you're actually building your capacity as far as staffing goes and you're supporting teachers.' ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at . Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Boston Globe
39 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Rural schools feel the pinch from Trump administration's cuts to mental health grants
Advertisement The $1 billion in grants for school-based mental health programs were part of a sweeping gun violence bill signed by President Joe Biden in 2022 in response to the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. The grants were meant to help schools hire more psychologists, counselors and other mental health workers, especially in rural areas. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Under the Biden administration, the department prioritized applicants who showed how they would increase the number of providers from diverse backgrounds, or from communities directly served by the school district. But President Donald Trump's administration took issue with aspects of the grant programs that touched on race, saying they were harmful to students. 'We owe it to American families to ensure that taxpayer dollars are supporting evidence-based practices that are truly focused on improving students' mental health,' Education Department spokesperson Madi Biedermann said. Advertisement School districts around the US cut off training and retention programs Lustica learned of her grant's cancellation in April in a two-page letter from the Education Department, which said the government found that her work violated civil rights law. It did not specify how. Lustica is planning to appeal the decision. She rejected the letter's characterization of her work, saying she and her colleagues abide by a code of ethics that honors each person's individuality, regardless of race, gender or identity. 'The rhetoric is just false,' Lustica said. 'I don't know how else to say it. I think if you looked at these programs and looked at the impact that these programs have in our rural school districts, and the stories that kids will tell you about the mental health professionals that are in their schools, it has helped them because of this program.' The grants supported programs in districts across the country. In California, West Contra Costa Unified School District will lose nearly $4 million in funding. In Alabama, Birmingham City Schools was notified it would not receive the rest of a $15 million grant it was using to train, hire and retain mental health staff. In Wisconsin, the state's Department of Public Instruction will lose $8 million allocated for the next four years. The state had used the money to boost retention and expand programs to encourage high schoolers to pursue careers in school-based mental health. 'At a time when communities are urgently asking for help serving mental health needs, this decision is indefensible,' state superintendent Jill Underly said in a statement. In recent House and Senate hearings, Democrats pressed Education Secretary Linda McMahon on the end of the grants and the impact on students. McMahon told them mental health is a priority and the grants would be rebid and reissued. Advertisement 'Anyone who works or spends time with kids knows these grants were funding desperately needed access to mental health care services,' American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten said in a statement. 'Canceling the funding now is a cruel, reckless act that puts millions of children at risk.' Grant programs put more mental health specialists in schools The strains on youth mental health are acute in many rural school districts. In one upstate New York district, half the students have had to move due to economic hardship in the last five years, creating instability that can affect their mental health, Lustica said. In a survey of students from sixth through 12th grade in one county, nearly half reported feeling sad or depressed most of the time; one in three said their lives lacked clear purpose or meaning. 'We've got huge amounts of depression, huge amounts of anxiety, lots of trauma and not enough providers,' Lustica said. 'School is the place where kids are getting a lot of the services they need.' Some families in the region are unable to afford private counseling or are unable to get their children to appointments given transportation challenges, said Danielle Legg, a graduate student who did an internship as a school social worker with funding from the grant program. 'Their access to mental health care truly is limited to when they're in school and there's a provider there that can see them, and it's vital,' Legg said. In the past three years, 176 students completed their mental health training through the program Lustica oversees, and 85% of them were hired into shortage areas, she said. Advertisement The program that offered training to graduate students at schools helped address staffing needs and inspired many to pursue careers in educational settings, said Susan McGowan, a school social worker who supervised graduate students in Geneva City School District. 'It just feels, to me, really catastrophic,' McGowan said of the grant cancellation. 'These positions are difficult to fill, so when you get grad students who are willing to work hand in hand with other professionals in their building, you're actually building your capacity as far as staffing goes and you're supporting teachers.'
Boston Globe
39 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Supreme Court meets Friday to decide 6 remaining cases, including birthright citizenship
The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. Advertisement These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Decisions also are expected in several other important cases. The court seemed likely during arguments in April to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools. Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. Advertisement The justices also are weighing a three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana that is making its second trip to the Supreme Court. Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are considering whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act. Free speech rights are at the center of a case over a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography. Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. Advertisement
