Returned deportee Abrego due in Tennessee court; future of smuggling case uncertain
NASHVILLE, Tennessee - Kilmar Abrego, the migrant returned to the U.S. after being wrongly deported to El Salvador, is due in court on Wednesday on human smuggling charges as the future of his criminal case and his presence in the country remain uncertain.
Federal prosecutors are seeking to convince U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw in Nashville, Tennessee, to reverse a magistrate judge's ruling allowing Abrego to be released on bail to await a trial.
Even if the judge orders him released from criminal custody, which could happen as soon as Wednesday, President Donald Trump's administration has said Abrego will immediately be detained by immigration authorities and face a second deportation.
Abrego, a 29-year-old Salvadoran migrant who had been living in Maryland, has remained in legal limbo for weeks as Trump administration officials have given conflicting accounts of whether he will be tried in a U.S. court or quickly removed from the country again.
Abrego was deported and imprisoned in his native El Salvador in March despite a 2019 court order barring him from being sent there because of a risk of gang persecution.
Abrego has become one of the most high-profile figures in the Trump administration's sweeping immigration crackdown. Rights groups and administration critics have held up his case as evidence of the administration's willingness to violate legal rights and evade courts in its effort to deport millions living illegally in the U.S.
The Trump administration, which portrays illegal immigration as a grave public safety threat, has alleged Abrego is a member of the MS-13 gang, a charge his lawyers deny.
Top stories
Swipe. Select. Stay informed.
Singapore Over 600 Telegram groups in Singapore selling, advertising vapes removed by HSA
Singapore Strong argument for cockpit video recording, says Iata chief in wake of Air India crash report
Asia Former deputy minister seen as surprise front runner for Malaysia's next Chief Justice: Sources
Singapore Baby died after mum took abortion pills and gave birth in toilet; coroner records an open verdict
Singapore Qantas flight from Singapore to Sydney delayed for days due to mechanical issues
Business Tycoon Robert Kuok's daughter Kuok Hui Kwong appointed CEO of Shangri-La Asia
Singapore Acute psychiatry services to be expanded across all healthcare clusters: MOH
Singapore New network links Home Team psychologists, mental health bodies to boost emergency response
The Justice Department brought Abrego back to the U.S. last month after securing an indictment charging him with taking part in a smuggling ring to bring immigrants to the U.S. illegally. He was accused of picking up migrants, including children, near the U.S.-Mexico border and transporting them to locations across the U.S.
Abrego has pleaded not guilty. His lawyers say the Trump administration brought the charges to cover up violations of Abrego's rights, and say alleged co-conspirators cooperating with prosecutors should not be trusted because they are seeking relief from deportation and criminal charges of their own.
A magistrate judge ordered Abrego released on bail last month, finding prosecutors had not shown evidence he needed to be detained before trial. Prosecutors are appealing that ruling and plan to call a Department of Homeland Security investigator as a witness on Wednesday to testify about the probe.
In an unusual move, Abrego's attorneys asked the judge to delay Abrego's potential release from criminal custody until Wednesday, citing concerns he will be quickly deported without a chance to challenge his removal.
In a separate civil lawsuit over Abrego's wrongful deportation, the Trump administration has indicated it would most likely seek to deport Abrego to a third country, not El Salvador, floating Mexico and South Sudan as options. REUTERS
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
16 minutes ago
- Business Times
Trump, Xi might meet ahead of or during October Apec summit in South Korea: SCMP
US President Donald Trump might visit China before going to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit between Oct 30 and Nov 1, or he could meet Chinese leader Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Apec event in South Korea, the South China Morning Post reported on Sunday citing multiple sources. The two countries have been trying to negotiate an end to an escalating tit-for-tat tariff war that has upended global trade and supply chains. The two sides have discussed a potential meeting between the leaders in the region this year, but they have not confirmed a date or location yet, according to a person familiar with the matter. Trump has sought to impose tariffs on US importers for virtually all foreign goods, which he says will stimulate domestic manufacturing and which critics say will make many consumer goods more expensive for Americans. He has called for a universal base tariff rate of 10 per cent on goods imported from all countries, with higher rates for imports from the most 'problematic' ones, including China: imports from there now have the highest tariff rate of 55 per cent. Trump has set a deadline of Aug 12 for the US and China to reach a durable tariffs agreement. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up A spokesperson for Trump did not respond to a request for comment about the reported plans for a meeting with Xi in the autumn. The two countries' most recent high-level meeting was on July 11, when US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had what both described as a productive and positive meeting in Malaysia about how trade negotiations should proceed. Rubio said then that Trump had been invited to China to meet with Xi, and said that both leaders 'want it to happen.' On Friday, China Commerce Minister Wang Wentao said China wants to bring its trade ties with the US back to a stable footing and that recent talks in Europe showed there was no need for a tariff war. REUTERS
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
The Jeffrey Epstein grand jury records: What comes next?
The request falls short of demands by Mr Trump's critics to release all of the government's files on Epstein. WASHINGTON - President Donald Trump on July 17 directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to ask a federal judge to release transcripts of grand jury testimony related to the 2019 indictment of Jeffrey Epstein for sex trafficking. On social media, he said that 'any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony' relating to Epstein should be released , 'subject to Court approval.' On July 18, Ms Bondi followed through. In court filings, she asked federal judges to unseal grand jury transcripts from Epstein's case, and the prosecution of his longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell as well. The request falls short of demands by Mr Trump's critics to release all of the government's files on Epstein, who died in federal custody while awaiting trial. Generally, grand jury evidence is narrowly tailored by prosecutors to fit the criminal charges they want to file. So even if judges agree to unseal the grand jury testimony, it is unlikely to offer anything approaching an exhaustive accounting of what FBI agents and prosecutors learned about Epstein's activities. And the requests by the Justice Department to release the material will now most likely be only the beginning of a complicated process of review, redaction and potential release of testimony. Here's how it might work. What is a grand jury? Grand juries are groups of citizens who hear evidence from prosecutors and witnesses in secret, and then decide whether to formally indict a person under investigation. Grand juries are used in both state and federal courts; they are typically convened to gather and weigh evidence before charges are filed in most felony cases. Compared with a trial, the grand jury process is friendlier to prosecutors, as jurors do not hear from lawyers representing the accused. And the standard for indicting people for a criminal offense is lower than the one for finding them guilty at trial. Why is grand jury material sealed? Grand juries are intended to be a screening mechanism, one that serves as a check on prosecutors to make sure that the government has a solid case before it brings criminal charges against someone in open court. Their proceedings are kept secret to protect the reputations of the people under government investigation who may turn out to be innocent or who are never charged with a crime. Secrecy also makes it easier to obtain full and truthful testimony from witnesses. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Priority for singles, higher quota for second-timer families to kick in from HDB's July BTO exercise Singapore Witness stand not arena for humiliation in sex offence cases, judge reminds lawyers Asia Japan PM's future in doubt after election debacle Business Bigger, quieter, greener: High-volume low-speed fans see rising demand in warming Singapore Singapore New home owners in Singapore find kampung spirit on BTO Telegram groups Singapore What would it take for S'pore to shed the dirty image of its blue recycling bins? Business DBS hits record high above $47; CDL up after director Philip Yeo announces resignation World Gaza civil defence says Israeli fire kills 93 aid seekers Prosecutors, investigators and jurors are generally barred from revealing not only grand jury testimony, but also the very existence of a grand jury proceeding. Violators can be punished for contempt of court. The rules around witnesses are less strict. Grand jury investigations sometimes become known to the public when prosecutors issue subpoenas to witnesses for their testimony. What are the rules that govern the unsealing of grand jury testimony? The operating manual for grand jury secrecy is Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. That rule details the process for filing a petition asking the court to unseal grand jury material, and a number of exceptions under which releasing it can be legally justified. Courts can unseal grand jury materials for national security reasons, to help a defendant dismiss a different grand jury's indictment or at the request of a foreign court for use in its own criminal investigation. The unsealing of grand jury materials is not a rubber-stamp process. The Florida courts refused to unseal Epstein materials until the state Legislature intervened by passing a new law. And federal courts remain divided on whether judges have the inherent power to unseal grand jury materials, outside of the exceptions listed in Rule 6(e). In the Epstein case, Ms Bondi cited 'long-standing and legitimate' public interest in the matter, as well as case law supporting that such interest can sometimes outweigh 'the countervailing interests in privacy and secrecy.' What grand juries have considered the Epstein case? Courts have convened several grand juries that heard evidence relating to Epstein's alleged crimes. The first was a Florida state grand jury in Palm Beach County that indicted Epstein for felony solicitation of prostitution in 2006. Nearly 200 pages of evidence gathered by that grand jury was made public last year, after Florida passed a law known as the 'Epstein grand jury bill,' intended to remove legal obstacles to its release. In July 2019, another grand jury, this one federal, indicted Epstein for sex trafficking in New York. Epstein died at the Metropolitan Correctional Center before a trial could be held; a Justice Department investigation found that he died by suicide. Yet another grand jury that heard Epstein-related evidence indicted Maxwell in 2020. She was later found guilty of conspiring with Epstein to abuse young girls. Ms Bondi's filings request the release of grand jury transcripts from Maxwell's case and Epstein's. In those filings, she said a similar motion would be filed in the Southern District of Florida, where prosecutors investigated Epstein before state charges were filed. What would be the process for unsealing the Epstein grand jury material? The Justice Department has taken the first step, by formally filing two petitions in the Southern District of New York, where Epstein and Maxwell were charged. In the Epstein case, the petition was submitted to Judge Richard M. Berman, who was nominated to the federal bench by President Bill Clinton, and who was overseeing Epstein's case in the weeks before his death. Mr Berman can now give the parties in the case the opportunity to be heard, and possibly other interested parties such as Epstein's victims and media organisations. If he then rules to unseal some grand jury material, it would be up to him to decide what documents to make public. In its filings, the Justice Department said it would redact 'victim-identifying information' as well as 'other personal identifying information' before release. Would the release of the Epstein grand jury material answer the public's questions around the case? Almost certainly not. The Epstein case has spawned countless conspiracy theories and a number of legitimate questions as well. Typically, grand jury testimony is neither exhaustive nor fully granular in its detail. It would not include all of the investigative material the FBI seized during its investigation of Epstein and Maxwell, such as the trove of photos found inside a locked safe at his Manhattan town house after he was arrested. Instead, it is intended to provide sufficient backup to convince jurors that there is probable cause that the person under investigation committed a crime. So the best preview of what the testimony might contain is the two indictments against Epstein and Maxwell. Those indictments have a narrow focus around Epstein's paying underage girls to exploit them sexually, and Maxwell's role in facilitating and sometimes participating in the abuse. They do not address Epstein's finances or his extensive network of wealthy and prominent friends. NYTIMES
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
UK to hold inquiry into miners strike 'Battle of Orgreave' four decades on
FILE PHOTO: A for sale sign stands by the closed Clipstone Colliery in Clipstone near Mansfield, central England, April 9, 2013. REUTERS/Darren Staples/File Photo LONDON - Britain said on Monday it would hold an inquiry into the "Battle of Orgreave", a violent confrontation between police and striking coal miners in 1984 at the height of a year-long industrial dispute with Margaret Thatcher's government. More than 5,000 striking miners clashed with a similar number of riot police who had been drafted in from across the country at the Orgreave coking plant near Sheffield in northern England. It was one of the most violent scenes witnessed during a British industrial dispute, and also a pivotal moment in the strike, launched against Thatcher's moves to close money-losing pits. The miners ultimately lost the broader fight to save their industry. The police have long faced accusations of brutality and using excessive violence at Orgreave on June 18, 1984. TV footage showed charges by officers on horseback and one miner being repeatedly struck on the head with a baton. More than 120 people were injured and 95 miners initially arrested and charged with riot and violent disorder. Those charges were all later dropped after the evidence was dismissed. Campaigners have for years demanded to know who was responsible for the deployment of the large number of police and their tactics, as well as what happened to some official documents. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper - Britain's interior minister whose Labour party was in opposition at the time of the strike - said an inquiry headed by Pete Wilcox, the Bishop of Sheffield, would be held to find out the truth. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Priority for singles, higher quota for second-timer families to kick in from HDB's July BTO exercise Singapore Witness stand not arena for humiliation in sex offence cases, judge reminds lawyers Asia Japan PM's future in doubt after election debacle Business Bigger, quieter, greener: High-volume low-speed fans see rising demand in warming Singapore Singapore New home owners in Singapore find kampung spirit on BTO Telegram groups Singapore What would it take for S'pore to shed the dirty image of its blue recycling bins? Business DBS hits record high above $47; CDL up after director Philip Yeo announces resignation World Gaza civil defence says Israeli fire kills 93 aid seekers "The violent scenes and subsequent prosecutions raised concerns that have been left unanswered for decades, and we must now establish what happened," she said. Kate Flannery, the Orgreave Truth & Justice Campaign Secretary, said they needed to be sure that the inquiry had the powers to have unrestricted access to all government and police papers. "We have waited a long time for this day and this is really positive news," she said. REUTERS
