Testimony on Deportation of Kilmer Abrego Garcia

GREENBERT, Maryland – In a federal court on Thursday, a US immigration officer provided testimony that did not clarify the Trump administration’s strategy for deporting Kilmer Abrego Garcia if he is released from pre-trial custody in Tennessee next week.

Thomas Giles, the assistant director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, was hesitant in addressing how the agency would manage Abrego Garcia’s situation. According to him, he could not commit to any decision until Abrego Garcia was actually in custody awaiting trial for federal charges.

“He was not in ICE custody, so there was no decision,” Giles stated.

Justice Department lawyers reiterated the intention to remove Abrego Garcia, who has a final removal order, but did not specify the exact process, raising concerns about due process in a closely monitored case where Giles’ testimony provided little clarity.

Giles’ appearance followed a directive from US District Judge Paula Sinis, who ordered the Trump administration to present witnesses concerning the removal plans for Abrego Garcia.

The government could either seek to revoke the deportation protections of residents from El Salvador or remove them from other countries entirely.

In March, Abrego Garcia was inadvertently transferred to the notorious MegaPrison in El Salvador, where reports indicate he faced severe psychological and physical abuse.

ICE Detainer

Giles mentioned that ICE placed a detainer on Abrego Garcia last month, meaning the agency has requested notification upon his release so they can take custody. He could potentially be released on July 16 after a pretrial hearing.

Last month, the Trump administration brought Abrego Garcia back to the US on federal human smuggling charges stemming from a traffic stop in 2019, which he denies.

His lawyer indicated in court that Abrego Garcia was returned to the US based on media reports, and no information was provided from the Trump administration.

Lawyers from the DOJ asserted that Abrego Garcia would be excluded from the United States before the trial concludes in Tennessee.

Concerns Over Removal

Abrego Garcia’s lawyer expressed worries that he could be removed again without a fair chance to contest legitimate proceedings or risk being sent to other countries where he could face danger.

Earlier that week, they urged Judge Sinis to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return to Maryland instead of remaining in Tennessee. Sinis is still deliberating on this request and recently denied a motion to dismiss the DOJ’s case as a dispute about his return to the US.

On Thursday, she mentioned considering a temporary restraining order if Abrego Garcia is released from custody, which would effectively prevent immigration officials from removing him from Tennessee or the US for 48 business hours.

A hearing on the restraining order is scheduled for 9 a.m. on Friday.

Ambiguity in Deportation Plans

Sasha Rand, who is representing Abrego Garcia in his immigration cases, pressed Giles on his knowledge of the specifics surrounding Abrego Garcia’s case. Giles admitted he was not directly involved and had limited time to prepare for the hearing.

Rand inquired about which countries, aside from El Salvador, Abrego Garcia could potentially be taken to. Giles responded that if there were plans to deport him to a third country, those arrangements could take days or weeks to finalize. He mentioned that Mexico would be one possibility, along with South Sudan, both of which the Trump administration has identified as acceptable for certain deportations.

In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court had allowed deportations to South Sudan for individuals from various nationalities affected by civil wars. A travel advisory from the US Department of State raises further concerns about safety.

Judge Sinis asked if it was feasible for Mexico to take Abrego Garcia. Giles indicated that it was a possibility.

When Rand pushed for clarity regarding South Sudan, Giles confirmed that removals to that country had occurred in the past.

Rand repeatedly sought to understand the concrete possibilities for Abrego Garcia’s deportation plan but was met with ambiguity from Giles, who reiterated that no decisions could be made until Abrego Garcia is in ICE custody.

Giles concluded that it remained unclear where Abrego Garcia would be held once in detention due to bed space considerations.