Latest news with #4thUSCircuitCourtofAppeals
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Appeals court won't lift order requiring Trump to facilitate return of asylum seeker deported to El Salvador
A divided federal appeals court on Monday rejected a request from the Trump administration to put on hold a judge's order requiring the government to 'facilitate' the return of a 20-year-old Venezuelan refugee who was deported earlier this year to El Salvador. The 2-1 ruling from the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals tees up a likely showdown at the Supreme Court over the order issued in April by US District Judge Stephanie Gallagher, who said the administration had violated a court settlement protecting some young migrants with pending asylum claims when it deported the man, referred to only as 'Cristian' in court filings, and directed it to work with Salvadorean officials to bring him back to the US. The high court had endorsed a similar, yet less specific, order from a different federal judge earlier this year in a separate case of a man unlawfully deported to the Central American country. Appeals court Judge DeAndrea Gist Benjamin, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, and Judge Roger Gregory, who was nominated to the court by former President Bill Clinton, voted in favor of keeping Gallagher's order intact. Judge Julius Richardson, who was appointed to the 4th Circuit by President Donald Trump, dissented. In a scathing solo concurrence, Gregory was critical of the administration's argument that the lower-court order should be put on hold because the government had made an 'indicative decision' that Cristian's asylum application would be denied if he returned to the US based on its claim that he's a member of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. That argument similarly had no sway when the administration asked Gallagher to undo her order. 'As is becoming far too common, we are confronted again with the efforts of the Executive Branch to set aside the rule of law in pursuit of its goals,' Gregory wrote. 'It is the duty of courts to stand as a bulwark against the political tides that seek to override constitutional protections and fundamental principles of law, even in the name of noble ends like public safety.' He continued: 'The district court faithfully applied the contractual provisions in dispute here, and it properly ordered the United States to remedy the violation of its explicit promises.' Writing in dissent, Richardson said Gallagher, a Trump appointee who sits in the federal courthouse in Baltimore, had overstepped when she issued the 'novel' ruling requiring Trump administration officials to make 'a good faith request … to the government of El Salvador to release Cristian to U.S. custody for transport back to the United States.' 'Many options may be available to district courts seeking to craft appropriate relief in response to deportations they find unlawful,' he wrote. 'But directing diplomatic negotiations to the Executive Branch is not among them.' Cristian was among the group of migrants who were deported in mid-March under the Alien Enemies Act, a sweeping 18th Century wartime authority Trump invoked to speed up removals of individuals it claims are members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. During a hearing earlier this month, Gallagher said officials had done virtually nothing to comply with her directive that it 'facilitate' Cristian's return to the US from the mega-prison in El Salvador where he was sent so he can have his asylum application resolved. She emphasized that while the administration may have deemed him a member of the Venezuelan gang, the settlement agreement he was covered under, which was finalized in November, did not include an exception for any use of that law. 'Process,' she said at the time, 'is important.' Benjamin agreed. 'The removal denied Cristian the chance to dispute on the merits the very accusations the Government now puts forth on appeal to justify its breach,' she wrote in a concurrence that was joined by Gregory. 'The Government's breach denied Cristian the benefit of the bargain and the process he was due.'
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal judge won't undo order requiring Trump administration to facilitate return of asylum seeker deported to El Salvador
A federal judge refused on Tuesday to wipe away her order that the Trump administration 'facilitate' the return of a 20-year-old Venezuelan asylum seeker deported to El Salvador but agreed to put the directive on hold so the government can appeal it. The decision by US District Judge Stephanie Gallagher, who was appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2019, comes nearly two weeks after she first ruled that the government had violated a court settlement protecting some young migrants with pending asylum claims when it deported the man, who is referred to only as 'Cristian' in court filings, in mid-March. Since that time, administration officials have done virtually nothing to comply with her directive that it 'facilitate' Cristian's return to the US from the mega-prison in El Salvador where he was sent so he can have his asylum application resolved. The Trump administration asked the judge earlier this week to wipe away her April 23 order, arguing the government had made an 'indicative decision' that Cristian's asylum application would be denied if he returned to the US based on its claim that he's a member of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. But Gallagher on Tuesday noted that the 'indicative decision' is far from a final decision on Cristian's asylum application and that such a determination 'essentially prejudges the outcome of the asylum proceeding.' Speaking from the bench during a hearing in Baltimore, Gallagher was critical of the administration's apparent willingness to trample over Cristian's due process rights – zeroing in on an issue that has been at the center of Trump's push to quickly deport scores of migrants from the US. 'It may be that the result here for Cristian is no asylum,' she said. 'But the settlement agreement says that we don't just get to skip to the end.' 'Process is important,' Gallagher continued. 'We go through the process; people are entitled to that.' Though Gallagher said she would not wipe away her order, she agreed to put it on hold for 48 hours to give the Justice Department time to appeal it to the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals. Cristian was part of the group of migrants deported in March under the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th century wartime authority that Trump invoked so he could quickly remove some migrants. But Gallagher has noted that the settlement agreement Cristian is part of, which was finalized in November, did not include an exception for any use of that law. In a similar case that has garnered more public attention, the Trump administration has been in a weekslong standoff with another federal judge in Maryland over her order that it facilitate the return of a man who was unlawfully deported in March. That man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, was also sent to the El Salvador prison, known as CECOT, in violation of a 2019 court order that said he could not be deported to that country. The judge overseeing that case is currently conducting an expedited fact-finding process to determine what the administration is doing to comply with her directive. For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
01-05-2025
- Business
- Business Standard
US court upholds restrictions on DOGE access to Social Security information
The full panel of judges on the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals voted 9-6 to keep the ruling from US District Judge Ellen Hollander in place while DOGE pushes forward with an appeal AP Washington A federal appeals court says it won't lift restrictions on the access that Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency has to Social Security systems containing personal data on millions of Americans. The full panel of judges on the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals voted 9-6 to keep the ruling from US District Judge Ellen Hollander in place while DOGE pushes forward with an appeal. The appellate decision was released Wednesday. Earlier this month Hollander issued a preliminary injunction in the case, which was brought by a group of labour unions and retirees who allege DOGE's recent actions violate privacy laws and present massive information security risks. Hollander said DOGE staffers could access data that has been redacted or stripped of anything personally identifiable, but only if they undergo training and background checks. She also said DOGE and its staffers must purge any of the non-anonymised Social Security data they have already obtained, and barred them from making any changes to the computer code used by the Social Security Administration. Attorneys representing DOGE had argued that anonymising the data would be too burdensome, and disrupt the Trump administration's efforts to root out any Social Security fraud. Appellate Judge Robert B. King, writing for the majority, said DOGE wants immediate and unfettered access to all Social Security records, including the highly sensitive personal information of essentially everyone in our Country, like family court and school records, mental health and medical records of SSA disability recipients, and bank and earning information. All this highly sensitive information has long been handed over to SSA by the American people with every reason to believe that the information would be fiercely protected, King wrote. Appellate judge Julius Richardson, who voted against the majority ruling, said the case should have been handled by a smaller three-judge group rather than the full panel of active appellate judges. He also said the plaintiffs haven't shown DOGE has actually snooped on any of their personal information, but instead are distressed by the possibility of abstract harm.
Time of India
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Judge castigates Trump administration for 'bad faith' in Abrego Garcia's deportation case
A federal judge said Tuesday that the Trump administration is ignoring court orders, obstructing the legal process and acting in "bad faith" by refusing to provide information about the steps they have taken, if any, to free a mistakenly deported Maryland man from an El Salvador prison and return him to the US. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "For weeks, Defendants have sought refuge behind vague and unsubstantiated assertions of privilege, using them as a shield to obstruct discovery and evade compliance with this Court's orders," US District Judge Paula Xinis wrote an the order Tuesday. "Defendants have known, at least since last week, that this Court requires specific legal and factual showings to support any claim of privilege. Yet they have continued to rely on boilerplate assertions. That ends now." She gave the administration until 6 pm Wednesday to provide those details. The US Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration nearly two weeks ago to facilitate Kilmar Abrego Garcia's return to the US from a notorious Salvadoran prison, rejecting the White House's claim that it couldn't retrieve him after mistakenly deporting him. Trump administration officials have pushed back, arguing that it is up to El Salvador - though the president of El Salvador has also said he lacks the power to return Abrego Garcia. The administration has also argued that information about any steps it has taken or could take to return Abrego Garcia is protected by attorney-client privilege laws, state secret laws, general "government privilege" or other secrecy rules. But Xinis said those claims, without any facts to back them up, reflected a "willful and bad faith refusal to comply with discovery obligations." It's not the first time the Trump administration has faced a scathing order from a federal judge over its approach to deportation cases. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now A three-judge panel on the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals scolded the administration last week, saying its claim that it can't do anything to free Abrego Garcia "should be shocking." That ruling came one day after a federal judge in Washington, DC, found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt of court for violating his orders to turn around planes carrying deportees to El Salvador in a different legal case. Democrats and legal scholars say President Donald Trump is provoking a constitutional crisis in part by ignoring court rulings, while the White House has said it's the judges who are the problem.
The Guardian
18-04-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Senate Democrat meets Ábrego García in El Salvador as legal battles continue
Show key events only Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog. My name is Tom Ambrose and I'll be bringing you all the latest news over the next few hours. We start with news that Maryland senator Chris Van Hollen met in El Salvador with Kilmar Ábrego García, a man who was sent there by the Trump administration in March despite an immigration court order preventing his deportation. Van Hollen posted a photo of the meeting on X, saying he also called Ábrego García's wife 'to pass along his message of love'. The lawmaker did not provide an update on the status of Ábrego García, whose attorneys are fighting to force the Trump administration to facilitate his return to the US. It was not clear how the meeting was arranged, where they met or what will happen to Ábrego García. El Salvador's president, Nayib Bukele, posted images of the meeting minutes before Van Hollen shared his post, saying: 'Now that he's been confirmed healthy, he gets the honor of staying in El Salvador's custody.' The Trump administration's claim that it can't do anything to free Kilmar Abrego Garcia from an El Salvador prison and return him to the US 'should be shocking,' a federal appeals court said Thursday in a blistering order that ratchets up the escalating conflict between the government's executive and judicial branches. A three-judge panel from the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously refused to suspend a judge's decision to order sworn testimony by Trump administration officials to determine if they complied with her instruction to facilitate Abrego Garcia's return. Judge J Harvie Wilkinson III, who was nominated by Republican president Ronald Reagan, wrote that he and his two colleagues 'cling to the hope that it is not naïve to believe our good brethren in the Executive Branch perceive the rule of law as vital to the American ethos.'
