The Justice Department has argued that federal courts do not have the authority to dictate to the executive branch how to handle foreign relations. The case in question concerns Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man who was removed from the U.S. last month after being accused of being a member of the MS-13 gang. The court ordered the U.S. government to take steps to facilitate his return to the U.S., but the DOJ stated that this only requires the removal of domestic obstacles hindering his return. The DOJ argued that they are only required to take actions allowing him to enter the U.S., not to engage in foreign relations in a specific way.
Despite Abrego Garcia having an order of removal issued by an immigration judge, he was removed to El Salvador due to an administrative error. The DOJ acknowledged that ICE was aware of his protection from removal to El Salvador, but he was mistakenly deported. The Assistant Director for the Removal Division within ICE stated that Abrego Garcia was no longer eligible for withholding of removal due to his alleged membership in MS-13, which is now designated as a foreign terrorist organization.
Following the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland ordering the “facilitation and effectuation” of Abrego Garcia’s return to the U.S., the Supreme Court called for clarification on this directive. The Supreme Court noted that the lower court must clarify the intended scope of the term “effectuate” and ensure that it does not exceed the District Court’s authority. The Supreme Court emphasized the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs and called for the lower court to clarify its directive.
Abrego Garcia, who is married to a U.S. citizen, is currently being held in El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center. The State Department confirmed his location and status in a filing, noting that he is detained under the domestic authority of El Salvador. Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele is visiting President Donald Trump at the White House. The meeting comes amidst the legal battle surrounding Abrego Garcia’s deportation and the court orders calling for his return to the U.S. as soon as possible.
The legal wrangling continues as the Justice Department faces pressure to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia to the U.S. The case has raised questions about the separation of powers and the role of the federal courts in dictating foreign relations policy. Despite the accusations against him, Abrego Garcia’s legal challenge denies his membership in the MS-13 gang and seeks his return to the U.S. The Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of clarifying the lower court’s directive to ensure that it aligns with the appropriate authority of the Executive Branch in foreign affairs.
The government’s handling of Abrego Garcia’s case has been criticized as “wholly lawless” by a federal judge. The confusion surrounding his removal and the legal challenges have sparked a debate over the appropriate actions to be taken to facilitate his return. The involvement of entities such as ICE, the Justice Department, and the State Department highlights the complexities of handling cases involving foreign nationals with ties to criminal organizations. The ultimate resolution of the case may have broader implications for immigration policy and the balance of power between the branches of government.
