Judge tosses criminal case against Kilmar Abrego Garcia, says federal prosecution was ‘vindictive’

A federal judge has dismissed the Trump administration’s criminal case against Kilmar Abrego Garcia, ruling it was a vindictive prosecution.

Judge Waverly Crenshaw Jr. said Friday that the government launched the criminal case only after it encountered problems with its deportation case against Mr. Abrego Garcia. Rather than simply bring him back from El Salvador, where he had been wrongly deported, the government secured a criminal indictment.

The judge specifically said that Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche had “tainted” the investigation into Mr. Abrego Garcia.

“The objective evidence shows that, without the success of Abrego’s lawsuit challenging his deportation to El Salvador, the government would not have brought this suit,” Judge Waverly wrote.

Mr. Abrego Garcia is still fighting possible deportation, but Friday’s ruling clears the criminal charges he also faced.

The Justice Department said it would appeal.

“Another activist judge has put politics ahead of public safety. The judge’s order is wrong and dangerous,” the department said in a statement.

The case stems from a 2022 incident in which Mr. Abrego Garcia was arrested on a Tennessee highway with a carload of migrants.

Police suspected he was smuggling them, but no charges were filed at the time.

Last year, as Mr. Abrego Garcia fought — and defeated — the Trump administration in a case challenging his deportation, the federal government renewed the criminal investigation.

Mr. Abrego Garcia participated in the controversial flights of migrants from the United States to El Salvador on March 15, 2025. Most were Venezuelans who the administration accused of being gang suspects and who were being deported under the Alien Enemies Act.

But some were Salvadorans the United States was sending back to their home countries.

Mr. Abrego Garcia was among them — although an immigration judge explicitly said he could not be removed for fear of gang retaliation.

The case became a cause for Democrats, who hailed Mr. Abrego Garcia as a “Maryland man” whose rights had been violated.

He sued, and in a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court, the administration was ordered to “facilitate” his return. Faced with this embarrassing loss, the administration did indeed bring him back — but only after obtaining the indictment in the criminal case.

This stems from a 2022 incident in which Mr. Abrego Garcia was arrested on a Tennessee highway with a carload of migrants.

Police suspected he was smuggling them, but no charges were filed at the time.

With the new indictment in hand, Mr. Abrego Garcia was removed from El Salvador.

But he was quickly granted temporary release, so the administration then sought to re-arrest and deport him. But Judge Paula Xinis, who initially ordered his repatriation, blocked his re-arrest, saying there was no valid deportation order.

The government subsequently obtained a valid deportation order, but Judge Xinis ruled that Mr. Abrego Garcia could remain at large while she further considered the deportation case.

This matter is still pending.

Mr. Abrego Garcia said he would accept deportation to Costa Rica, and that country indicated it would accept it.

But the Trump administration rejected that idea, instead seeking less easy deportation options in Africa. Judge Xinis questioned the motivations for these decisions.

On Friday, Homeland Security committed to carrying out the eviction.

“The final order deporting Kilmar Abrego Garcia stands, and activist judges cannot change that fact,” DHS said. “This Salvadoran is not going to stay in our country. »

Losing the criminal case is another black eye for a Justice Department that has struggled to defend the actions of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In the criminal case, Judge Crenshaw, an Obama appointee, said the idea to file charges against Mr. Abrego Garcia appears to have come from Justice Department headquarters in Washington.

He said Homeland Security only reopened its investigation after Mr. Abrego Garcia remotely won his deportation case.

The timing of this, and Mr. Blanche’s public comments linking the criminal case to Mr. Abrego’s success in his deportation case, “taint the investigation with a vindictive motive.”

He said he had not found “real vindictiveness”, but said the government had failed to counter “the presumption of vindictiveness”.

“The evidence he characterizes as newly discovered could have been diligently obtained well before April 2025. Moreover, it does not explain the government’s change in position from impeaching Abrego and not prosecuting him to then prosecuting him and not deporting him,” the judge concluded.