Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran national whose erroneous deportation ignited a constitutional standoff, returned to the United States on June 6, 2025, to face federal criminal charges.
His arrival followed a months-long defiance of judicial orders by the Trump administration, culminating in an indictment that critics decry as politically motivated retribution.
Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador on March 15, 2025, despite a 2019 immigration court order shielding him from removal due to fears of gang persecution.
The administration later acknowledged the deportation as an “administrative error” but refused for months to facilitate his return, even after the Supreme Court affirmed a lower court’s order demanding compliance.
Attorney General Pam Bondi announced a two-count indictment unsealed Friday, alleging Abrego Garcia conspired to transport undocumented migrants—including children and MS-13 gang members—from Texas to other U.S. states between 2016 and 2025.
Prosecutors claim he made over 100 such trips, potentially facing 10 years imprisonment per count if convicted. Bondi stated his eventual post-sentence deportation to El Salvador would proceed .
Abrego Garcia’s attorney, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, dismissed the charges as “fantastical” and a “kitchen sink” of allegations.
He argued the indictment relies on testimony from incarcerated co-conspirators seeking leniency and accused the administration of manufacturing charges to mask its initial error.
“Due process means the chance to defend yourself before you’re punished, not after,” said Sandoval-Moshenberg.
The case exposed deepening tensions between the judiciary and the executive branch. After U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered Abrego Garcia’s return in April, the administration stalled for weeks, claiming inability to retrieve him. The Supreme Court reinforced Xinis’s ruling, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor calling his deportation a “warrantless arrest” lacking legal basis .
Notably, Ben Schrader, chief of the criminal division in Nashville’s U.S. Attorney’s Office, resigned on May 21—coinciding with the sealed indictment.
Sources confirm Schrader departed over ethical objections, citing concerns the case was “pursued for political reasons.” His resignation statement emphasized doing “the right thing, in the right way, for the right reasons.”
The administration’s handling of the case underscores a pattern of challenging judicial authority. Legal scholars note the defiance echoes historical crises, such as Southern governors resisting desegregation orders.
Federal courts possess tools to enforce compliance, including contempt sanctions, but these remain untested against a sitting administration .
Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), who visited Abrego Garcia in El Salvador, framed the return as a partial victory for due process but cautioned, “This has never been about the man—it’s about his constitutional rights & the rights of all” .
Abrego Garcia appeared briefly in a Nashville federal court Friday, confirming he understood the charges.
He remains detained pending an arraignment June 13. Meanwhile, his legal team vows to challenge the indictment’s credibility, spotlighting the 2022 traffic stop that prompted no charges despite initial smuggling suspicions .
President Trump, aboard Air Force One, praised Bondi’s actions and declared the charges justified his administration’s stance: “Take a look at what they found in the grand jury.”
Yet the timing of the indictment—filed after courts compelled Abrego Garcia’s return—leaves lingering questions about the rule of law’s resilience in polarized times.