Lawyers Seek More Depositions in Case of Deported Alleged MS-13 Gang Member

Lawyers representing Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who the Trump administration alleges is an MS-13 gang member and was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, are pushing for additional depositions to uncover the extent of the administration’s involvement in his release from custody in El Salvador.

In a recent motion filed with U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of Maryland, Abrego Garcia’s legal team requested permission to depose representatives from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the State Department, and the Department of Justice (DOJ). The central question they seek to answer is what steps, if any, the Trump administration took to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release and subsequent return to El Salvador.

The motion specifically requests that Judge Xinis order the government to designate individuals from each department who can provide testimony regarding information known or reasonably available to their respective agencies. Citing a federal rule designed to streamline the discovery process and prevent unnecessary burden on top officials, the lawyers argue that this approach would be the most efficient and least intrusive way to obtain the necessary information.

By allowing the government to select its own Rule 30(b)(6) representatives, the plaintiffs hope to avoid compelling the heads of these departments to testify directly. Instead, they aim to place the responsibility on the government to thoroughly prepare their chosen representatives with the department’s complete knowledge of the relevant issues in the case. The attorneys emphasized that the scope of the depositions would be narrowly focused on the government’s actions related to Abrego Garcia’s release and return.

The lawyers further noted that the court had already approved four depositions, with three already completed. Despite these efforts, they contend that they remain "in the dark" regarding the government’s actions to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release from custody and his return to El Salvador. The court documents suggest a lack of transparency from the government’s side.

The motion also hints at the possibility of seeking testimony from the White House. Abrego Garcia’s legal team argues that, based on public statements, the case appears to involve decision-making at the White House in addition to the three departments already mentioned.

The legal team stated that depending on the information gleaned from the authorized departmental depositions, they might need to seek additional testimony from a knowledgeable representative of the White House.

As of the report, DHS, the State Department, the DOJ, and the White House have not responded to requests for comment regarding the motion. The motion itself is partially redacted, with excerpts from previous depositions concerning Abrego Garcia’s location and custodial status being concealed.

Judge Xinis, appointed by former President Barack Obama, issued a two-page order addressing the matter. She noted that the Trump administration invoked the "state secrets privilege" to avoid answering questions regarding Abrego Garcia’s deportation.

The judge has set a deadline of May 12 for both parties to submit briefs addressing the legal and factual bases for the invocation of these privileges. A court hearing on the matter is scheduled for May 16 in Greenbelt, Maryland.

In testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem asserted that Abrego Garcia "is a citizen of El Salvador and should never have been in this country, and will not be coming back to this country." She went on to state that "There is no scenario where Abrego Garcia will be in the United States again."

Noem further characterized Abrego Garcia as a "terrorist," "human smuggler," and "wife beater," emphasizing that he "is not a citizen of this country and is a dangerous individual who does not belong."

The Trump administration initially acknowledged that Abrego Garcia’s deportation to El Salvador was an error. However, they have since emphasized his alleged MS-13 membership and documented abuse of his wife while he was living illegally in Maryland.

The case highlights the complex legal and political issues surrounding immigration enforcement, particularly in cases involving alleged gang members. The invocation of the state secrets privilege raises questions about government transparency and the balance between national security and individual rights. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for future immigration proceedings and the treatment of individuals accused of gang affiliation.

Abrego Garcia’s lawyers have continued to press for more information about the specific actions of the Trump administration and its justification for his deportation. The requested depositions from DHS, the State Department, and the DOJ, and potentially the White House, are a means to clarify the extent of the government’s involvement and the reasons behind its actions. The judge’s decision on whether to grant these additional depositions will be a critical point in the case.

The case remains ongoing, with the upcoming hearing in May expected to provide more insight into the government’s claims of state secrets privilege and the arguments from Abrego Garcia’s legal team.