The BareStory
The U.S. administration has asked a federal judge to allow the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Liberia, marking the second attempt to remove him from the country. A legal request filed Friday asks the court to dissolve an injunction that prevents his removal. The action follows Abrego Garcia's prior deportation to El Salvador, which was reversed after a court found it violated a judicial order. He was subsequently returned to the U.S. and now faces federal human smuggling charges, which he denies.
In a court filing, the Justice Department argued that Abrego Garcia has received sufficient due process and that his legal challenges are exhausted. According to the department, a U.S. asylum officer interviewed him and determined he did not establish a risk of persecution or torture in Liberia. The government also submitted declarations stating that Liberia has provided "sufficient and credible" assurances of his safety.
Attorneys for Abrego Garcia countered that a review by a single officer does not constitute adequate due process. They have asked the judge to block the deportation until an immigration judge can review the case, including the risk he could be sent from Liberia to El Salvador. His lawyers allege the administration’s efforts are retaliation for unfavorable court rulings.
According to Abrego Garcia’s attorneys, Costa Rica has offered him refugee status, but they claim the U.S. government conditioned this offer on him pleading guilty to the smuggling charges. The administration previously conceded that his deportation to El Salvador earlier this year was a mistake. In a press release cited in one report, the Liberian government stated it agreed to accept Abrego Garcia on a "strictly humanitarian and temporary basis." He is currently in federal immigration detention.
How it may affect me
As a U.S. reader:
• The court’s decision on what constitutes adequate due process could influence the legal standards and procedures used in future U.S. deportation cases.
• The outcome may clarify the balance of power between the executive branch and the judiciary regarding immigration enforcement, especially in legally contested cases.
• This case could affect how the U.S. negotiates with other nations to accept deportees, potentially influencing future foreign policy and immigration enforcement strategies.
