ICE doesn’t plan to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia again as long as judge’s order banning it stands

ICE doesn’t plan to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia again as long as judge’s order banning it stands

2026-01-03•politics
Authors: The Associated Press
Publisher:WTOP News
Published: 12/31/2025
Language:English
--:--
--:--
Elon
Welcome johnszeledon, I am Elon, and this is Goose Pod. Today is Saturday, January 03th. I am Taylor, and we are here to discuss why ICE does not plan to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia again, at least as long as a judge is standing in their way.
Elon
This case is absolutely wild. We are looking at a hearing on January twenty-eighth regarding vindictive prosecution. It is a high-stakes legal battle that could redefine executive power. The government is really pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable in a criminal case for purely political reasons.
Taylor
It is so intense. Newly unsealed documents show high-level Justice Department officials were basically breathing down the necks of local prosecutors. They wanted an indictment fast, calling it a top priority right after a major legal embarrassment involving a mistaken deportation to El Salvador earlier last year.
Elon
The government is charging him with human smuggling from a traffic stop back in twenty-twenty-two. But they did not bring charges until twenty-twenty-five, after he won a landmark case. It feels like a calculated move to punish a legal victory, which is provocative and quite pragmatic.
Taylor
Exactly, and the timing is what makes it feel like a narrative script. He was pulled over for speeding with nine passengers three years ago, given a warning, and then suddenly it is a federal crime once he makes the administration look bad in the supreme court.
Elon
Judge Waverly Crenshaw found evidence this might be retaliation. He noted that Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche even went on Fox News suggesting the charges were linked to Garcia winning his case. That is a very bold admission for a high-ranking official in our government.
Taylor
It is like a corporate power move gone wrong. The emails show Aakash Singh, working under Blanche, was coordinating this from the top. He even told the local U.S. Attorney to hold the indictment until they got clearance. It shows a very high level of coordination.
Elon
Clearance from the Deputy Attorney General for a speeding-related smuggling case? That is extreme micromanagement. It suggests the goal was not justice for a traffic stop, but rather a strike against an individual who challenged the system and actually won his freedom against the state machinery.
Taylor
And the local guy, Rob McGuire, tried to say he made the decision alone. But these unsealed emails tell a story of a joint decision-making process involving the highest levels of the DOJ. It really undermines their original narrative of independence and local control in this case.
Elon
To understand why the DOJ is so obsessed with this, we have to look back at the absolute chaos of his deportation. In March, Garcia was snatched and sent to El Salvador by mistake. It was a total failure of the administrative process that led to this nightmare.
Taylor
He ended up in CECOT, that high-security terrorism prison in El Salvador. Imagine being a union sheet metal worker from Maryland, living here since twenty-nineteen, and suddenly you are in a cell for terrorists because of a typo. It is a terrifying situation for any young family.
Elon
The administration then tried to justify it by painting him as an MS-thirteen member. Their evidence? He wore a Chicago Bulls hat and had some tattoos. That is incredibly flimsy, even for a high-risk environment. It is using stereotypes instead of actual criminal evidence or verified data.
Taylor
It really is. Experts pointed out that the Bulls logo is just a sports hat, but the administration claimed the horns were a gang symbol. They even said a smiley face and a cross tattoo were gang markers. It sounds like they were just searching for any narrative.
Elon
I appreciate a good pivot, but that is just bad data analysis. He had no criminal record and had attended every single immigration check-in since twenty-nineteen without a single issue. He was a model of compliance. You can not just ignore a decade of good behavior.
Taylor
His wife, Jennifer, had to fight all the way to the Supreme Court to get him back. Even when the court ordered his return, the administration tried to interpret the word facilitate as narrowly as possible. They were doing everything they could to avoid bringing him back home.
Elon
They basically said they did not have to help him leave the Salvadoran prison. It took a unanimous Supreme Court ruling to finally force their hand. He finally made it back to the United States in June, but the legal battle was only just beginning at that point.
Taylor
But the moment he landed, they hit him with those human smuggling charges from the twenty-twenty-two traffic stop. It feels like they were waiting at the gate with handcuffs just to save face. It is a very aggressive way to handle a civil rights victory in court.
Elon
It is a relentless drive to win at any cost. They even tried to deport him to several African countries like Uganda and Liberia while he was in custody, despite him having no connection to them. It shows they were desperate to get him out of the country.
Taylor
That was such a wild plot twist. Judge Paula Xinis basically asked if the government could even be trusted to follow orders anymore. She was the one who finally ordered his release in December, citing a total lack of lawful authority to hold him any longer.
Elon
She saw through the strategy. The administration was trying to hold him indefinitely without a clear plan for removal, which is a direct violation of due process. It is a total breakdown of the system. We need institutions that follow their own rules and respect the judiciary.
Taylor
And through all of this, he is just a father of three who has lived in the United States for fourteen years. The contrast between his personal life and the government portrayal of him is just staggering. It makes you wonder how many other cases are handled this way.
Elon
The core conflict here is the tension between executive power and the judiciary. The administration wants total control over immigration enforcement, but the courts are saying the law still applies to everyone, regardless of their status. It is a fundamental disagreement over constitutional boundaries and legal limits.
Taylor
It is a classic power struggle. On one side, you have the DOJ calling this a top priority, and on the other, judges like Crenshaw and Xinis calling out lawless behavior. I respect the drive to enforce the law, but you cannot bend the rules to win.
Elon
Exactly. When the emails show they were coordinating the charges while he was still stuck in that Salvadoran prison, it looks bad. It looks like they were building a secondary trap in case they lost the first one. It is a very strategic, if not slightly cynical, approach.
Taylor
And the local prosecutors are caught in the middle. McGuire tried to claim independence, but the paper trail shows he was taking orders from the top. It is a conflict of integrity within the department itself. They are sacrificing their own career prosecutors for a high-profile political win.
Elon
The administration is also clashing with the public perception. They tried to frame him as a dangerous terrorist, but the court records show a guy who was just driving people to a construction site. It is a battle of narratives that they are currently losing in the courtroom.
Taylor
That is the problem with using labels like MS-thirteen without solid evidence. It creates a narrative that is hard to maintain when the facts do not align. The court is essentially demanding a higher standard of proof than the administration is willing or able to provide right now.
Elon
It is also a conflict about the definition of due process. Does the government have the right to deport someone first and ask questions later? The courts are giving a very firm no to that. It is about protecting the structural integrity of our entire legal system today.
Taylor
It is truly a standoff. The executive branch thinks it can move fast and break things, but the judicial branch is there to remind them that the brakes exist for a reason. This friction is exactly what the founders intended to prevent the rise of absolute power in government.
Elon
The impact of this case is far-reaching. It has become a symbol of the administration aggressive tactics. Every time a judge rebukes them, it weakens their overall legal standing in future cases. It creates a paper trail of misconduct that other lawyers will definitely use for their clients.
Taylor
It is creating a precedent that protects everyone. Justice Sotomayor even noted that if the government can deport anyone without consequence, then even U.S. citizens could be at risk of being snatched. That is a massive implication for civil liberties in this country for every single person.
Elon
That is a chilling thought. The erosion of due process is not just an immigration issue; it is a systemic risk. If you can ignore one court order, you can ignore them all. It compromises the very foundation of what makes a society functional and predictable for its people.
Taylor
It also affects international relations. The U.S. is paying El Salvador six million dollars a year to jail deportees. This case puts a very uncomfortable spotlight on that specific financial arrangement and whether it is being used to bypass our own domestic legal protections for individuals in custody.
Elon
And let us not forget the human cost. A family was torn apart, a man was imprisoned in a foreign country, and the trust in our institutions has been severely damaged. That is hard to rebuild, even with a favorable court ruling. It leaves a lasting scar on society.
Taylor
It has also galvanized legal advocates. They see this as a test case for how to fight back against what they call a wholly lawless approach to immigration enforcement. It is a roadmap for future litigation against executive overreach in the immigration space and beyond for everyone.
Elon
Looking ahead, the January twenty-eighth hearing is the next big milestone. If the case is dismissed, it will be a historic victory for Abrego Garcia and a major embarrassment for the DOJ. It would send a clear message that vindictive prosecution has no place in our legal system.
Taylor
It will be fascinating to see if they try to pivot again. If they can not re-detain him, will they find another way to push their agenda, or will they finally let this one go? The administration does not have a great track record of admitting defeat easily.
Elon
I doubt they will back down. They have invested too much political capital. We might see a push for new legislation or different enforcement strategies to bypass these judicial roadblocks. But the courts are standing firm for now. We will be watching Nashville very closely for the final outcome.
Taylor
That is the end of today discussion on Goose Pod. We covered a lot of ground on the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case today. Thank you for listening, johnszeledon.
Elon
It was a pleasure to dive into this with you. Stay informed and stay curious about the world around you. We will see you tomorrow for another deep dive on Goose Pod.

ICE won't detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia again as long as a judge's order stands. Unsealed documents reveal DOJ officials pushed for charges after Garcia won a landmark case, suggesting vindictive prosecution. This case highlights executive overreach versus judicial checks and balances in immigration enforcement, with significant implications for due process and civil liberties.

ICE doesn’t plan to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia again as long as judge’s order banning it stands

Read original at WTOP News →

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — U.S. immigration officials do not plan to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia again as long as a judge’s order banning it stands, according to a Tuesday court filing.The plans by President Donald Trump’s administration are the latest in the saga over the Salvadoran citizen’s case that has become a lightning rod for both sides of the immigration debate as he fights to remain in the U.

S. after a mistaken deportation to his home country, where he was imprisoned.Immigration and Customs Enforcement did make clear they would detain Abrego Garcia if the order was lifted, Liana J. Castano, assistant director for field operations, wrote in the filing.Trump officials have accused Abrego Garcia of being a member of the MS-13 gang, but he has vehemently denied the accusations and has no criminal record.

The administration brought him back to the U.S. in June under a court order, but only after issuing an arrest warrant on human smuggling charges in Tennessee.U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis earlier this month questioned whether government officials could be trusted to follow orders barring them from taking Abrego Garcia back into immigration custody or deporting him.

A Justice Department push to indictEarlier Tuesday, a newly unsealed order in the criminal case against Abrego Garcia revealed that high-level Justice Department officials pushed for his indictment, calling it a “top priority,” only after he was mistakenly deported and then ordered returned to the U.

S.Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty in federal court to the human smuggling charges. He is seeking to have the case dismissed on the grounds that the prosecution is vindictive, arguing the Trump administration is targeting him as punishment for the embarrassment of his mistaken deportation.To support that argument, he has asked the government to turn over documents that reveal how the decision was made to prosecute him in 2025 for an incident that occurred in 2022.

Abrego Garcia had recently been in immigration custody for three months before Xinis ordered his release on Dec. 11. In that time, the government said it planned to deport him to Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and, most recently, Liberia.In her Dec. 11 order, Xinis found that immigration officials had no viable plan to remove Abrego Garcia from the U.

S. and said he could not be held indefinitely. She issued a separate order barring ICE from re-detaining him, at least for the time being. After a hearing on the issue, Xinis ordered the government to file the brief they released Tuesday outlining whether they planned to detain Abrego Garcia again.Abrego Garcia’s human smuggling case stems from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee where he was pulled over for speeding with nine passengers in the car.

State troopers discussed the possibility of human smuggling among themselves. However, he was ultimately allowed to leave with only a warning. The case was turned over to Homeland Security Investigations, but there is no record of any effort to charge him until April 2025, according to court records.

The newly unsealed Dec. 3 order from U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw compelled the government to provide some documents to Abrego Garcia and his attorneys, although it does not give a lot of detail on their contents.Claims of a ‘vindictive’ prosecutionEarlier, Crenshaw found that there was “some evidence” that the prosecution of Abrego Garcia could be vindictive.

He specifically cited a statement by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on a Fox News program that seemed to suggest that the Department of Justice charged Abrego Garcia because he had won his wrongful deportation case.Rob McGuire, who was the Acting U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee until late December, argued that those statements were irrelevant because he alone made the decision to prosecute, and he has no animus against Abrego Garcia.

In the unsealed order, Crenshaw writes, “Some of the documents suggest not only that McGuire was not a solitary decision-maker, but he in fact reported to others in DOJ and the decision to prosecute Abrego may have been a joint decision.”The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Tennessee released a statement saying: “The emails cited in Judge Crenshaw’s order, specifically Mr.

McGuire’s email on May 15, 2025, confirm that the ultimate decision on whether to prosecute was made by career prosecutors based on the facts, evidence, and established DOJ practice. Communications with the Deputy Attorney General’s Office about a high-profile case are both required and routine.”The email referenced was from McGuire to his staff saying Blanche “would like Garcia charged sooner rather than later,” according to Crenshaw’s order.

The order also shows that Aakash Singh, who works under Blanche in the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, contacted McGuire about Abrego Garcia’s case on April 27, the same day that McGuire received a file on the case from Homeland Security Investigations. That was several days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Abrego Garcia’s favor on April 10.

On April 30, Singh said in an email to McGuire that the prosecution was a “top priority” for the Deputy Attorney General’s Office, according to the order. Singh and McGuire continued to communicate about the prosecution. On May 18, Singh wrote to McGuire and others to hold the draft indictment until they got “clearance” to file it.

“The implication is that ‘clearance’ would come from the Office of the Deputy Attorney General,” Crenshaw writes.A hearing on the motion to dismiss the human smuggling case on the basis of vindictive prosecution is scheduled for Jan. 28.___Associated Press journalist Hannah Schoenbaum contributed from Salt Lake City.

Copyright© 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.

Analysis

Background+
Related Info+
Impact+
Core Event+
Conflict+
Future+
View All Podcasts →