Pam Bondi Reaffirms El Salvador’s Role in Abrego Garcia Deportation Case

Pam Bondi Reaffirms El Salvador’s Role in Abrego Garcia Deportation Case

Attorney General Pam Bondi has firmly stated that the decision regarding Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, an undocumented immigrant from El Salvador wrongfully deported to his home country last month, ultimately rests with El Salvador. In a press briefing held on Wednesday, Bondi reiterated the Trump administration’s position—that the choice to return Abrego Garcia lies solely with President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador.

Clarifying the Administration’s Stance

During the press conference, Bondi made it clear that she believes there is no going back for Abrego Garcia. “He is not coming back to our country,” she responded emphatically when questioned about his status. The attorney general’s statements come in the wake of legal confusion surrounding Abrego Garcia’s deportation.

The Background of the Case

Abrego Garcia, originally from El Salvador, had been residing in Maryland before his deportation in March. Reports indicate that he is currently held in a maximum-security prison in El Salvador. This situation raises serious concerns because both a federal court and the Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to take action to facilitate his return to the U.S. for the proper deportation procedures.

Legal Developments Unfold

Bondi emphasized that the jurisdiction over Abrego Garcia’s situation lies with Bukele. She stated, “President Bukele said he was not sending him back. That’s the end of the story. If he wanted to send him back, we would give him a plane ride back. There was no situation, ever, where he was going to stay in this country. None.” Her assertion highlights an ongoing debate about international responsibilities and the sovereignty of nations.

Supreme Court Ruling and Its Implications

Last week, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s decision mandating that the U.S. government must facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador. The court ordered that his case be treated as if he had not been improperly deported, reiterating the need for due process under U.S. law.

Fast-Tracked Legal Actions

In a fresh development, a federal judge in Maryland mandated Trump administration lawyers and plaintiffs to engage in an expedited discovery process lasting two weeks to explore efforts aimed at securing Abrego Garcia’s return. Notably, the judge’s order demands that top officials from the Department of Homeland Security and State Department be deposed under oath to clarify the administration’s commitments towards Abrego Garcia’s case.

No Claim to Citizenship

Throughout her statements, Bondi has been clear about the legal standing of Abrego Garcia. She highlighted that he is not a U.S. citizen and had lived illegally in the country. A U.S. court had earlier granted him temporary protective status in 2019, citing a clear risk of persecution if he were to be returned to El Salvador. This designation shows that Abrego Garcia’s case is complex, intertwining immigration law and human rights concerns.

Judicial Perspectives

It’s important to state that neither the Supreme Court ruling nor prior lower court orders require Abrego Garcia to remain in the United States. Instead, the courts have focused on ensuring that those facing deportation receive essential constitutional protections, including the right to habeas corpus, allowing them to contest their removal through the legal system.

Repeated Emphasis on Sovereignty

This week marked several instances where Trump officials reiterated that the final decision regarding Abrego Garcia’s return to the U.S. falls to El Salvador. These assertions were made while President Trump hosted President Bukele for a bilateral summit, underlining the ongoing diplomatic interactions between the two nations.

A Diplomatic Quandary

When asked by reporters about the situation, Bondi, alongside other Cabinet officials, maintained that it is a matter strictly for Bukele’s government to decide. She stated, “That’s up to El Salvador if they want to return him. That’s not up to us.” Her comments reflect the complex dynamics of international relations, particularly concerning immigration issues.

Facilitating Responsibilities in Deportation

Bondi also explained that the U.S. would be willing to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return should the Salvadoran government express its intention to do so. She outlined, “If they wanted to return him, we would facilitate it – meaning to provide a plane.” This willingness to assist underscores the U.S. government’s ongoing involvement in international immigration matters.

The Bigger Picture of Immigration Policies

El Salvador, in recent years, has accepted hundreds of migrants returned from the U.S. This includes over 200 Venezuelan nationals who were removed under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act and alleged MS-13 gang members as part of a $6 million agreement with the U.S. Administration. These deportation agreements highlight the ongoing complexities of immigration policy and its impacts on various nations.

Public and Media Perception

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller offered his support for Bondi’s comments, positioning Abrego Garcia as a Salvadoran national. He suggested that it is presumptuous for American media to imply that the U.S. could dictate terms to El Salvador regarding its citizens. Miller also added that two courts had determined that Abrego Garcia was connected with the MS-13 gang, adding to the contentious nature of his case.

Seeking Clarity and Fairness

As this situation continues to evolve, many will be watching closely to see how the courts and governments navigate the complexities of national sovereignty, human rights, and immigration law. The future course of action regarding Abrego Garcia will be closely monitored, with all parties hoping for a resolution that respects both legal principles and international relations.