U.S. Attorneys Defend Prosecution of Immigrant Facing Deportation

Justice Department must convince judge it didn't target Kilmar Abrego Garcia in retaliation for fighting deportation

Published on Feb. 26, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

In a court hearing on Thursday, the U.S. Justice Department must convince a judge that it did not prosecute Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an undocumented immigrant married to a U.S. citizen, as retaliation for him fighting his deportation. The government alleges Garcia was involved in a human smuggling conspiracy, but his lawyers argue the prosecution is in retaliation for his deportation challenge. The judge has signaled he may agree with Garcia's lawyers, citing comments made by a top DOJ official about investigating the case after a court ruled against the deportation.

Why it matters

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between the government's immigration enforcement efforts and the rights of undocumented immigrants to challenge deportation proceedings. It raises questions about the Justice Department's motivations and whether it is using prosecutorial power for political purposes.

The details

Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire secured an indictment in 2025 against Kilmar Abrego Garcia for human trafficking stemming from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee, where Garcia had nine passengers in his vehicle but was not arrested or ticketed. Garcia's lawyers argue the prosecution is retaliation for him challenging his deportation, which the government mistakenly carried out in April 2025 before being forced to return him in May. Messages between McGuire and DOJ officials contradict his claim that he alone decided to prosecute Garcia.

  • In April 2025, Kilmar Abrego Garcia was mistakenly deported to El Salvador.
  • In May 2025, the government returned Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the U.S. after court rulings demanded it.
  • In 2025, Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire secured an indictment against Kilmar Abrego Garcia for human trafficking from a 2022 traffic stop.

The players

Kilmar Abrego Garcia

An undocumented immigrant married to a U.S. citizen who is facing prosecution that his lawyers argue is retaliation for him challenging his deportation.

Robert McGuire

An Assistant U.S. Attorney based in Nashville who secured an indictment against Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

Todd Blanche

The Deputy Attorney General who made comments about investigating the case after a court ruled against Kilmar Abrego Garcia's deportation.

Aakash Singh

The Associate Deputy Attorney General who told Robert McGuire that prosecuting Kilmar Abrego Garcia should be considered a 'top priority'.

Waverly D. Crenshaw

The U.S. District Judge presiding over the case who has signaled he may agree with Kilmar Abrego Garcia's lawyers that the prosecution is retaliation.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“What should we do as the Department of Justice when a judge is accusing us of doing something wrong? We have an obligation … to investigate it, and that's exactly what we did.”

— Todd Blanche, Deputy Attorney General (The Washington Post)

“The only 'independent' decision Mr. McGuire made was whether to acquiesce in [the Office of the Deputy Attorney General's] directive to charge this case, or risk forfeiting his job as Acting U.S. Attorney — and perhaps his employment with the Department of Justice — for refusing to do the political bidding of an Executive Branch that is avowedly using prosecutorial power for 'score settling.'”

— Sean Hecker, Kilmar Abrego Garcia's attorney (The Washington Post)

What’s next

On Thursday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire and two agents from the Department of Homeland Security are expected to testify in the court hearing. Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw has said the testimonies of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and Associate Deputy Attorney General Aakash Singh are not necessary.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between the government's immigration enforcement efforts and the rights of undocumented immigrants to challenge deportation proceedings. It raises questions about whether the Justice Department is using prosecutorial power for political purposes, rather than solely for legitimate law enforcement reasons.