The Supreme Court issued an important victory. They have announced that the U.S. needs to do more to ensure Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a native of El Salvador who was mistakenly deported, is returned. Abrego Garcia’s case has received wide media coverage. This interest is the result of the highly irregular nature of his detention and his removal from the country. On March 12, ICE agents arrested him at his home in Maryland. Only three days after arresting him, they transported him into deportation back to El Salvador.
While living in the U.S. for ten years Abrego Garcia had never been accused of committing any crime. His attorneys have long maintained that there are no ties to the MS-13 gang, which the U.S. government has designated a foreign terrorist organization. The Trump administration appealed the district court’s order to return Abrego Garcia. When the administration didn’t comply, the Supreme Court stood behind a lower court’s ruling that ordered a federal agency to bring him back.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court emphasized that Abrego Garcia “was subject to a withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador, and that the removal to El Salvador was therefore illegal.” This could be huge, too — this statement confirms the illegality of his deportation, which the Justice Department originally blamed on an “administrative error.”
Abrego Garcia’s wrongful removal has opened broader questions about the processes, or lack thereof, that immigration authorities are taking. After his arrest, he was flown back to El Salvador where he is still in jail. The Supreme Court’s decision is a huge breakthrough for his case. In addition, we’re working to ensure that it’s clear that the federal government has obligations to help ensure his return.
And for Abrego Garcia’s legal advocates, the relief was immediate following the Supreme Court’s decision. This decision reflects a robust dedication to protecting due process in an increasingly punitive immigration system. The case received additional notoriety when the Trump administration admitted that Abrego Garcia had in fact been wrongly deported.
As this example plays out, it is a good reminder of the complexities and illogic in the world of immigration law and enforcement. This ruling’s implications can and should help shape the outcome of future, similar cases about wrongful deportations.