I try not to burden you with procedural minutiae in the key Trump II cases, but an unexpectedly strange 30-minute status conference ended a short time ago in the Abrego Garcia II civil case. What would normally be a snoozy housekeeping matter — in this instance, to set a briefing schedule on the Trump administration’s renewed bid to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Liberia – went off the rails a bit.
In retrospect, it’s clear that U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of Maryland came in to the conference call already annoyed with the Trump administration for trying to bum-rush her into making a quick decision on removing Abrego Garcia to Liberia, and then the DOJ career attorney on the case almost immediately stepped in it, for reasons that remain baffling.
First, Xinis asked about reports that soon after filing to remove Abrego Garcia to Liberia instead of his designated country of Costa Rica — arguing it wasn’t viable — the administration reached an agreement with Costa Rica to begin accepting a substantial number of similarly situated third-country deportees. Does that change the administration’s position in this case? Xinis asked.
DOJ’s Ernesto Molina Jr. responded: “I have raised that issue. I have not heard that it has changed the government’s position.”
Then it got weird.
Unprompted, Molina said Abrego Garcia is free to self-deport to Costa Rica at any time and that he doesn’t have to wait for the government to remove him to Liberia or anywhere else. I’m scratching my head because Abrego Garcia is still under indictment in Tennessee and cannot legally leave the country without violating court orders in his criminal case.
Xinis was incredulous. “Are you saying that that indictment is going to be dismissed? Because that’s a really important fact.”
“No, you honor,” Molina replied.
“You know Mr. Abrego can’t go anywhere pending criminal indictment,” an astounded Xinis said. “There’s nowhere he can voluntarily go without violating a court order.”
It wasn’t clear whether Molina was changing the government’s position, misspoke, or got his tongue tied somehow. But Xinis wasn’t done.
“This is chimerical. This is fantasy,” Xinis said of the notion that Abrego Garcia can just voluntarily self-deport.
“Yes, your honor, that is correct,” Molina conceded.
At that point, Xinis turned to the original point of annoyance: The goverment’s demand that she rule by a date certain on the third country removal or it will deem her as having denied its motions.
“You have no legal authority to tell me when I am to decide anything in my court,” Xinis said, later adding: “You can’t deem an order adjudicated before it’s adjudicated.”
Xinis clearly suspected something was up. “What’s the rush on this?” she asked, openly wondering why the government was pressing her to decide quickly on the third-country removal while conceding it’s not dismissing the indictment.
“The same Department of Justice that is prosecuting Mr. Abrego Garcia in Tennessee is the same Department of Justice in this case. It smacks of an emergency of your own making, not a real one,” Xinis said. “Be clear: There is no emergency if what you’re telling me is true, that you want to prosecute Mr. Abrego Garcia in Tennessee.”
The faux urgency and the new claim that Abrego Garcia could leave the country at any time confounded her.
“I’m just trying to figure out why I get these interesting and sharply worded memorandum … if I don’t move on the schedule you’d like me to.”
“I regret if the court viewed the government statements as commanding, if you will,” Molina replied.
“There seems to be no inclination that the Department of Justice is dismissing this indictment.” Xinis said. “The bottom line is you either want him here for your criminal case or you don’t.”
If it’s both, she said, that “raises some serious concerns.”
It never became clear if Molina was hinting at a new government position in the case or just bungled things.
The hearing concluded with the usual housekeeping to set a briefing schedule in latest phase of the litigation that began in March 2025.
