Abrego Garcia ordered released pending trial on migrant smuggling charges
However, the decision by US magistrate judge Barbara Holmes in Nashville, Tennessee does not necessarily mean Abrego, as he prefers to be known, will go home to his family. The judge had acknowledged at a June 13 court hearing that Abrego was likely to be placed in immigration detention even if he is released.
Abrego, a Maryland resident whose wife and young child are US citizens, was deported on March 15 to El Salvador, despite a 2019 immigration court ruling that he not be sent there because he could be persecuted by gangs. Officials called his removal an 'administrative error', but for months said they could not bring him back.
Critics of US President Donald Trump pointed to Abrego's case as evidence his administration was prioritising increased deportations over due process, the bedrock principle people in the US, whether citizens or not, can contest governmental actions against them in the courts. Trump, who has pledged to crack down on illegal immigration, said Abrego belongs to the MS-13 gang, an accusation his lawyers deny.
The justice department brought Abrego back to the US on June 6 after earlier securing an indictment charging him with working with at least five co-conspirators as part of a smuggling ring to bring immigrants to the US illegally.
Prosecutors said Abrego, 29, picked up migrants from the US-Mexico border more than 100 times, and transported firearms and drugs.
Abrego has pleaded not guilty. His lawyers said the Trump administration brought the charges to cover up their violations of Abrego's rights, and said the alleged co-conspirators cooperating with prosecutors should not be trusted because they are seeking relief from deportation and criminal charges of their own.
In her ruling on Sunday, Holmes said the government failed to show Abrego posed a danger to the community or was unlikely to appear in court, scheduling a hearing for Wednesday.
In a separate civil case, Greenbelt, Maryland-based US district judge Paula Xinis is investigating whether the Trump administration violated her order to facilitate Abrego's return from El Salvador. The US Supreme Court unanimously upheld the order.
Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
16 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
Trump threatens ‘severe consequences' if Putin blocks Ukraine peace
Trump meets Putin on Friday to discuss war in Ukraine Trump praises call with Zelenskiy, European leaders Macron says no territorial swap schemes on table Europe and Kyiv feared decisions being made over their heads Russia says its war aims remain unchanged By Andrea Shalal, Thomas Escritt and Tom Balmforth Trump did not specify what the consequences could be, but he has warned of economic sanctions if a meeting between himself and President Putin in Alaska on Friday proved fruitless. The comments by Trump and the mood music after a virtual meeting of Trump, European leaders and President Volodymyr Zelenskiy could provide some hope for Kyiv after fears the Alaska meet could sell out Ukraine and carve up its territory. However, Russia is likely to resist Ukraine and Europe's demands strongly and previously said its stance had not changed since it was set out by Putin in June 2024. When asked if Russia would face any consequences if Putin does not agree to stop the war after Friday's meeting, Trump responded: 'Yes, they will.' Asked if those consequences would be sanctions or tariffs, Trump told reporters: 'I don't have to say, there will be very severe consequences.' But the president also described the aim of the meeting between the pair in Alaska as 'setting the table' for a quick follow-up that would include Zelenskiy. 'If the first one goes okay, we'll have a quick second one,' he said. 'I would like to do it almost immediately, and we'll have a quick second meeting between President Putin and President Zelenskiy and myself, if they'd like to have me there.' Trump did not provide a time frame for a second meeting. RED LINES European leaders and Zelenskiy had earlier spoken with Trump in a last-ditch call hosted by Germany to lay out red lines ahead of the Alaska meeting. 'We had a very good call. He was on the call. President Zelenskiy was on the call. I would rate it a 10, very friendly,' Trump said. French President Emmanuel Macron said Trump agreed that Ukraine must be involved in any discussions about ceding land while Zelenskiy said Trump had supported the idea of security guarantees in a post-war settlement. 'President Trump was very clear that the United States wanted to achieve a ceasefire at this meeting in Alaska,' Macron said. 'The second point on which things were very clear, as expressed by President Trump, is that territories belonging to Ukraine cannot be negotiated and will only be negotiated by the Ukrainian president.' German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who hosted the virtual meeting, said the principle that borders could not be changed by force must continue to apply. 'If there is no movement on the Russian side in Alaska, then the United States and we Europeans should … increase the pressure,' he said. 'President Trump knows this position, he shares it very extensively and therefore I can say: We have had a really exceptionally constructive and good conversation with each other.' Trump and Putin are due to discuss how to end the three-and-a-half-year-old conflict, the biggest in Europe since World War Two. Trump has previously said both sides will have to swap land to end fighting that has cost tens of thousands of lives and displaced millions. RUSSIA MAKES SHARP ADVANCE INTO UKRAINE On a day of intense diplomacy, Zelenskiy flew into Berlin for virtual meetings with European leaders and then with Trump. He and the Europeans worry that a land swap could leave Russia with almost a fifth of Ukraine, rewarding it for almost 11 years of efforts to seize Ukrainian land, the last three in all-out war, and embolden Putin to expand further west in the future. Russian forces have made a sharp thrust into eastern Ukraine in recent days in what may be an attempt to increase the pressure on Kyiv to give up land. 'I told the U.S. president and all our European colleagues that Putin is bluffing (about his stated wish to end the war),' Zelenskiy said. 'He is trying to apply pressure before the meeting in Alaska along all parts of the Ukrainian front. Russia is trying to show that it can occupy all of Ukraine …' A source familiar with the matter said the call with Trump discussed possible cities that could host a three-way meeting, depending on the outcome of the talks in Alaska. Wary of angering Trump, European leaders have repeatedly said they welcome his efforts, while stressing that there should be no deal about Ukraine without Ukraine's participation. Trump's agreement last week to the summit was an abrupt shift after weeks of voicing frustration with Putin for resisting the U.S. peace initiative. Trump said his envoy had made 'great progress' at talks in Moscow. A Gallup poll released last week found that 69% of Ukrainians favour a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible. But polls also indicate Ukrainians do not want peace at any cost if that means crushing concessions. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Alexei Fadeev earlier said Moscow's stance had not changed since last year. As conditions for a ceasefire and the start of talks, the Kremlin leader had demanded that Ukraine withdraw its forces from four regions that Russia has claimed as its own but does not fully control, and formally renounce its plans to join NATO. Kyiv swiftly rejected the conditions as tantamount to surrender.
The South African
2 hours ago
- The South African
I want a three-way with Putin and Zelensky, says Trump on pending meeting
US President Donald Trump said Wednesday he was planning a second meeting with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin soon after Friday's Alaska summit – this time with Ukraine leader Volodymyr Zelensky included. Trump is due to sit down with Putin in Anchorage on Friday, the first meeting between the Russian leader and a sitting US president since 2021. 'If the first one goes okay, we'll have a quick second one,' he told reporters. 'I would like to do it almost immediately, and we'll have a quick second meeting between president Putin and president Zelensky and myself, if they'd like to have me there.' The high-stakes talks come with Trump seeking to broker an end to Russia's nearly three-and-a-half year war in Ukraine, and Zelensky and his European allies have urged the Republican to push for a ceasefire. A stepped-up Russian offensive, and the fact Zelensky has not been invited to the Anchorage meeting Friday, have heightened fears that Trump and Putin could strike a deal that forces painful concessions on Ukraine. Trump said Russia would face 'very severe consequences' if Putin did not agree to end the war after Friday's meeting, without elaborating. The US leader promised dozens of times during his 2024 election campaign to end the war on his first day in office but has made scant progress towards brokering a peace deal. He threatened 'secondary sanctions' on Russia's trading partners over its invasion of Ukraine but his deadline for action came and went last week with no action announced. Trump told reporters he'd had a 'very good call' with European leaders including Zelensky as he took questions from reporters at an arts event at Washington's Kennedy Center. 'I would rate it at 10. You know – very, very friendly,' he said. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news. © Agence France-Presse
The Star
6 hours ago
- The Star
Sleeping While the Lies Were Written – A Call to Stand with South Africa
Ngomane Nicholas | Published 2 hours ago While South Africans rested under our night sky, a distorted narrative about our nation was quietly taking shape in Washington. The Trump administration, through the US State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labour, released a report that paints South Africa in the most troubling and inaccurate terms. This so-called assessment, claiming to be the result of 'engagements with stakeholders' in South Africa, alleges a severe deterioration of human rights in the past year. It brands our Expropriation Act as 'substantially worrying,' accuses the Economic Freedom Fighters of encouraging farm attacks, and concludes that Afrikaners are being targeted as an ethnic minority. These claims are not only misleading — they are outright falsehoods. The report leans on selective anecdotes, ignores verified data, and omits the context of our constitutional democracy. It overlooks that land reform policies are grounded in law, subject to judicial review, and aimed at correcting historic injustices. It repeats discredited myths about 'white genocide,' despite numerous independent investigations debunking such claims. This narrative is not about protecting human rights — it is a political weapon designed to undermine South Africa's sovereignty. The most dangerous aspect of this report is its arrogance. Too often, foreign officials arrive on our soil convinced they have diagnosed our problems before speaking to the people who live here. By the time they check into their hotels, they have already designed solutions that disregard local realities. The following day, they begin recruiting allies to impose their vision. This is not partnership — it is paternalism. It reduces our people to subjects of external judgment rather than citizens capable of defining their destiny. This is not the first time Africa has been subjected to such treatment. History is filled with examples of outsiders painting the continent as broken to justify interference. Nelson Mandela warned that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of others; the inverse is also true — when our sovereignty is undermined, the freedom of all who value self-determination is at risk. Today, the tactics have shifted from open colonialism to narrative warfare, but the aim is the same: to weaken, divide, and control. It is no coincidence that this report comes at a time when the South African government is seeking to grow revenue and resources in a competitive global economy. The subtext is clear—apply pressure through negative international perception, create economic vulnerability, and force political concessions. Tariffs, trade restrictions, and selective sanctions often follow such campaigns. This is not about human rights; it is about leverage. South Africans cannot allow this narrative to go unchallenged. We must respond by writing, speaking, researching, and sharing our truths. Our universities, journalists, artists, and community leaders must actively dismantle the myths being exported about our nation. My research, The Invisible Faith in Democracy: Ekaslam, has shown how foreign perceptions often strip township communities of their agency, treating them as evidence for pre-written stories rather than as living, complex societies. This report is a textbook example of that practice. To those abroad who care about fairness: understand that South Africa is a vibrant, plural democracy with a fiercely independent judiciary, active civil society, and a free press. Our path is not perfect — no democracy's is — but it is ours to walk. Do not mistake the noise of politics for the collapse of a nation. To those within our borders: let us unite in defending our sovereignty, for this moment calls for solidarity beyond party lines. The architects of this report, along with the local voices who contributed to it, should bear the weight of shame for misrepresenting the country we have built together. South Africa is not defined by the distortions of foreign actors. It is defined by the resilience of its people, the strength of its Constitution, and the unwavering belief that freedom, once won, must be guarded fiercely. The world must know we will not bow. We will rise—together. Ngomane, PhD Candidate | University of the WitwatersrandTheatre Practitioner | Researcher | Dramaturge
