Judge Releases Kilmar Abrego Garcia, Issues Restraining Order Amid Multi‑Country Deportation Debate
Updated (2 articles)
Judge Questions Government’s Ability to Enforce Removal Limits U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis opened the hearing by demanding a clear, trustworthy plan for any future removal, citing prior misrepresentations by officials and expressing doubt they would honor court‑ordered limits [1][2]. She noted the government had offered no viable strategy to deport Abrego Garcia, prompting her to scrutinize the agency’s credibility [1][2]. The judge’s interrogation underscored the court’s role in checking executive overreach in immigration enforcement [1][2].
Previous Unauthorized Deportation and Return Highlight Case Irregularities Records show Abrego Garcia was forcibly sent to El Salvador in March without legal authority, where he was detained before later re‑entering the United States after Supreme Court intervention [1][2]. The unlawful removal and subsequent return illustrate the case’s “extremely irregular and extraordinary” nature, according to the judge [2]. This background fuels the ongoing dispute over his current immigration status [1][2].
Release and Temporary Restraining Order Keep Abrego Garcia Free On December 11, Judge Xinis ordered Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody after finding no actionable deportation plan [1][2]. She issued a temporary restraining order the following day, barring any immediate removal while the litigation proceeds [1][2]. The order effectively keeps him out of detention pending further court decisions [1][2].
Government’s Multi‑Nation Deportation Options and Costa Rica Controversy Federal officials have listed Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and most recently Liberia as potential destinations, while Costa Rica reportedly offered refugee status that the court says was mischaracterized as unwilling [1][2]. The judge highlighted this discrepancy, questioning the accuracy of the government’s portrayal of Costa Rica’s stance [1][2]. Additionally, Abrego Garcia faces separate human‑smuggling charges in Tennessee, and his lawyers have sought sanctions after a Border Patrol official made disparaging public comments [1][2].
Sources
-
1.
King5: Judge Allows Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Remain Free While She Considers Immigration Issues: Emphasizes the judge’s distrust of government removal plans, details the multi‑country options, and stresses the sanctions request over Border Patrol remarks .
-
2.
AP: Judge Allows Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Remain Free While She Considers Immigration Issues: Highlights the case’s extraordinary irregularity, repeats the removal options, and notes the Tennessee smuggling charges and sanctions pursuit .
Timeline
Mar 2025 – The government deports Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador without legal authority, sending him to prison there before he later returns to the United States after a Supreme Court ruling forces his repatriation [1][2].
Late 2025 (post‑Supreme Court) – The Trump administration initially resists complying with the Court’s order to bring Abrego Garcia back, but eventually concedes and allows his return, setting the stage for the current immigration dispute [1][2].
2025 (prior to Dec.) – Federal officials outline a multi‑country removal plan, naming Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and most recently Liberia as possible destinations, while Costa Rica offers refugee status yet is portrayed by the court as unwilling to accept him [1][2].
Dec 11, 2025 – U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis orders Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody after finding the government has no viable deportation plan, emphasizing the case’s “extremely irregular and extraordinary” nature [1][2].
Dec 12, 2025 – Judge Xinis issues a temporary restraining order that bars any immediate removal of Abrego Garcia while the court weighs his immigration status, reinforcing the protection granted the day before [1][2].
Dec 22, 2025 – In a Monday hearing, Judge Xinis questions the government’s ability to honor the restraining order, asking, “Can we trust the government to follow the court‑ordered limits?” and presses lawyers for a concrete implementation plan, highlighting ongoing mistrust of executive actions [1][2].
Dec 22, 2025 – Abrego Garcia’s Tennessee defense team seeks sanctions against a Border Patrol official who made disparaging remarks on national news, arguing the comments threaten a fair trial and violate prior orders limiting public statements [1][2].