A Maryland federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to retrieve a second wrongfully deported migrant, intensifying scrutiny of the administration’s aggressive deportation policies just weeks after a similar case reached the Supreme Court.
Quick Takes
- Judge Stephanie Gallagher ruled that a 20-year-old Venezuelan man was deported to El Salvador in violation of a court settlement protecting young migrants with pending asylum cases.
- This follows a similar case where the Supreme Court ordered the release of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, another migrant wrongfully sent to El Salvador.
- The ruling challenges President Trump’s deportation initiative targeting up to 1 million people in his first year back in office.
- The judge emphasized the government must take “affirmative steps” to facilitate the migrant’s return despite Justice Department objections.
Court Orders Second Migrant’s Return
Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher of the federal court in Maryland has ordered the Trump administration to facilitate the return of a 20-year-old Venezuelan man identified only as “Cristian” who was deported to El Salvador. The decision marks the second time in recent weeks that federal courts have determined the administration wrongfully deported individuals protected under existing agreements. Gallagher’s ruling found that the deportation violated a 2019 settlement agreement designed to protect young migrants with pending asylum applications who entered the United States as unaccompanied minors.
The case bears striking similarities to that of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, whose deportation to El Salvador prompted intervention from the Supreme Court. Both cases highlight potential procedural issues within President Trump’s accelerated deportation initiative, which aims to remove up to one million people within his first year back in office. The administration has faced criticism for apparently moving forward with deportations without fully accounting for existing legal protections and court agreements.
Legal Basis for the Ruling
The foundation of Judge Gallagher’s ruling stems from a class action lawsuit filed in July 2019 by immigrants who entered the U.S. as unaccompanied children. The plaintiffs alleged unlawful policy modifications regarding asylum applications. Gallagher herself had previously approved a settlement in this lawsuit, which included provisions requiring the return of protected individuals like Cristian to the United States for proper processing of their asylum applications. Despite this clear precedent, the deportation proceeded.
The Justice Department contested the judge’s authority, arguing that Gallagher lacks jurisdiction to review Cristian’s deportation or compel his return. Government lawyers claimed the deportation was justified under President Trump’s proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act, citing concerns about the Tren de Aragua gang. However, Judge Gallagher specifically noted in her ruling that no evidence was presented indicating Cristian posed any threat to public safety, undermining a key element of the government’s argument.
Broader Implications
This latest ruling raises significant questions about the administration’s adherence to judicial instructions regarding immigration enforcement. In both recent cases, federal judges have had to intervene to correct what they determined were violations of existing legal agreements or protections. The plaintiffs’ attorneys have accused the Trump administration of deliberately attempting to circumvent the settlement agreement, using drug charges against Cristian as pretext for his deportation despite his protected status.
The parallel case of Mr. Abrego Garcia continues to develop under Judge Paula Xinis, who is enforcing an order for his release. This comes despite President Trump’s public claims that the administration is powerless to bring him back. Judge Gallagher’s ruling reinforces the judiciary’s position that the government must take affirmative steps to facilitate the return of wrongfully deported individuals, potentially establishing a pattern that could affect future deportation proceedings under the current administration.
Administration’s Response
The administration has not yet issued a formal response to this latest ruling. However, the Justice Department’s arguments in court suggest resistance to judicial oversight of deportation decisions, particularly those made under the authority of the Alien Enemies Act. The administration has maintained that Cristian’s drug conviction made him subject to Trump’s proclamation, though the judge found this reasoning insufficient to override the protections granted by the settlement agreement.
As these cases continue to unfold, they may establish important precedents regarding the limits of executive authority in immigration enforcement, particularly when balanced against existing court agreements and the rights of asylum seekers. The outcomes could significantly impact how the administration proceeds with its stated goal of accelerated deportations while remaining within the boundaries of legal settlements and judicial rulings.
Sources:
- Judge Orders Administration to Seek Return of Another Deported Migrant – The New York Times
- Judge rules the Trump administration violated a 2019 settlement in deporting a man to El Salvador
- Trump Administration Must Seek to Return Another Wrongly Deported Man, Judge Rules
