The Justice Department was back in court on Friday as the judge grew more and more frustrated.
After a hearing the day before ended with an annoyed judge who wasn't able to get any straight answers out of a witness, the DOJ was supposed to present documents relating to Kilmar Ábrego García, a Maryland man who the Department of Homeland Security accidentally deported to a brutal prison in El Salvador.
Judge Paula Xinis called a second day of hearings after the DOJ was unable to produce documents that an ICE official mentioned in his testimony. The DOJ did little to relieve her concerns that the government would simply snatch Ábrego García again and deport him to a third-party country such as South Sudan, where others have already been sent.
Thomas Giles, an ICE official based in Los Angeles, took the stand Thursday afternoon, where Ábrego García's lawyer got him to admit he wouldn't have had anything to do with the deportation and knew nothing about the case other than what had been reported by the media.
At issue on Friday was the DOJ's claim that Judge Xinis had no jurisdiction over the case because Ábrego García was now in Tennessee. The case first began after Ábrego García was taken to El Salvador due to a "clerical error," according to the DOJ lawyer.
The judge said it was “patently unconstitutional” to arrest Ábrego García back in March, said WJZ News reporter Mike Hellgren, who was live posting about the event on X.
Ábrego García's lawyer said that he is concerned that if his client is released, immigration officers will nab him and take him to an unknown country.
Not identifying the country where Ábrego García could be sent. The judge was frustrated that the witness from Thursday didn't even reach out to the office that would be handling the case.
Attorney Jay Reding noted the judge's anger at the top of the hearing, writing on Bluesky, "This is a BIG deal. Once the government is no longer presumed to be a good-faith actor in the courts, that has repercussions in nearly every case. TBQH, the presumption of regularity has been widely abused for a long time and deserves to go, but to get a judge to that point takes a LOT of f--kery."
Lawyer Deb Golden pointed to the judge's statement, "You have taken the presumption of regularity and you've destroyed it in my view."
She wrote on Bluesky that it's "hard to explain to non-lawyers what an explosive statement that is from a federal judge."
"This is something that's missing in a lot of the analyses about the higher number of injunctions against the Trump administration compared to prior administrations," wrote civil litigator Owen Barcala on BlueskyOwen Barcala on Bluesky. "They treat lower court judges like idiots, blatantly hiding information and obfuscating. Of course, they're going to get more adverse rulings."
He also pointed out an exchange about the 48 hours after Ábrego García is put into ICE custody after being released. The DOJ misquoted the judge, saying that at that point she'd lose jurisdiction, but she said she'd lose jurisdiction if he were removed from the U.S.
“You do conveniently omit the fact that you weren’t supposed to move him to El Salvador,” Xinis said.
Barcala made up his own legal back and forth; he implied that he cut through the niceties even further.
"It's completely speculative to suggest we would put him on a plane to evade jurisdiction," Barcala imagined the DOJ saying.
"Didn't you do exactly that with this exact person?" he characterized Xinis' message.
"Well, yes, there's that," he invented the DOJ saying.
"Excuse me, I need to get an aspirin," he closed.
