Trump’s DOJ Calls Out Judge Over Legal Shenanigans

Trump’s Department of Justice firmly rejects contempt allegations in a mistaken deportation case, sending a clear message about executive power in foreign affairs.

Quick Takes

The DOJ has rejected contempt allegations from attorneys representing Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador
Judge Paula Xinis demanded daily updates on efforts to return Abrego Garcia, expressing frustration at the government’s perceived inaction
The Trump administration maintains that courts cannot compel executive actions in foreign relations, citing constitutional separation of powers
The DOJ argues “facilitate” in the Supreme Court’s order means removing domestic obstacles, not forcing diplomatic actions
Officials report Abrego Garcia is alive and secure in El Salvador, detained under that country’s domestic authority

Constitutional Showdown Between DOJ and Federal Judge

President Trump’s Department of Justice has taken a firm stance against what it views as judicial overreach in the case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a man mistakenly deported to El Salvador. The legal battle intensified after U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the administration to provide daily updates on efforts to return Abrego Garcia following a Supreme Court ruling that directed the government to facilitate his return. The DOJ has made it clear that while it respects the court’s authority in domestic matters, foreign affairs remain the exclusive domain of the executive branch under constitutional separation of powers principles.

At the heart of the dispute is the interpretation of the Supreme Court’s directive to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return. The Trump administration contends this means removing domestic obstacles to his potential return, not compelling diplomatic action with a sovereign nation. Judge Xinis has expressed mounting frustration with what she perceives as government inaction, stating during a recent hearing: “The Supreme Court has spoken quite clearly. And yet, I can’t get an answer today about what you’ve done in the past, which means, again, the record as it stands, is that nothing has been done.”

A deputy assistant attorney general told the judge overseeing the case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the Maryland man who was deported to El Salvador in error, that he does "not have the information" regarding Abrego Garcia's whereabouts. https://t.co/KcZDdBsLDf

— ABC News (@ABC) April 11, 2025

DOJ Defends Executive Authority in Foreign Relations

In a strongly worded response to the motion for contempt, the Department of Justice emphasized that federal courts lack constitutional authority to direct the executive branch in matters of foreign relations. The DOJ filing pointed to longstanding precedent regarding presidential powers in international affairs. “The federal courts have no authority to direct the Executive Branch to conduct foreign relations in a particular way, or engage with a foreign sovereign in a given manner,” officials stated in court documents. “That is the ‘exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations.'”

“The relief sought by Plaintiffs is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s instruction requiring this Court to respect the President’s Article II authority to manage foreign policy,” the DOJ brief stated.

The administration has reported that Abrego Garcia is alive and secure in El Salvador, though he remains detained under that country’s domestic authority. This has done little to satisfy Judge Xinis, who has ordered daily status reports and bluntly asked government attorneys during proceedings: “Have they done anything?” The case highlights tensions between judicial oversight and executive discretion in immigration enforcement, particularly in cases involving international cooperation.

Disputed Facts and Legal Interpretations

Complicating matters are factual disputes surrounding Abrego Garcia’s background. The Trump administration has claimed he is an MS-13 gang member, which his attorneys vehemently deny. Abrego Garcia was deported despite a removal order explicitly stating he should not be sent to El Salvador due to potential gang-related threats. His attorney, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, has urged immediate action, stating: “The Supreme Court upheld the District Judge’s order that the government has to bring Kilmar home. Now they need to stop wasting time and get moving.”

“Defendants understand ‘facilitate’ to mean what that term has long meant in the immigration context, namely actions allowing an alien to enter the United States. Taking ‘all available steps to facilitate’ the return of Abrego Garcia is thus best read as taking all available steps to remove any domestic obstacles that would otherwise impede the alien’s ability to return here. Indeed, no other reading of ‘facilitate is tenable—or constitutional—here,” stated the DOJ brief.

The DOJ has signaled potential difficulties with the plaintiffs’ requests for discovery in the case, noting ongoing diplomatic discussions and the possible invocation of attorney-client and State Secrets privileges. Administration officials maintain they have fulfilled the Supreme Court’s directive by treating Abrego Garcia’s case as if he had not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The government’s position remains that “any further intrusion into this sensitive process—and any directive from the Court to take action against the nation of El Salvador—would be inconsistent with the care counseled by the Supreme Court.”