Federal judge erupts at Trump administration in migrant deportation hearing

The American boycott judge Paula Chenenis, the Trump administration, on Friday, in a noticeable hearing focused on Kilmar Armando Abyerigo Garcia, a member of Salvadori, and a alleged MS-13 member who was deported from Maryland to El Salvador in March, administration officials were an administrative mistake.

The hot decline was full of exchange between the judge and the Ministry of Justice, as it closed its attempts to summon the state’s secrets of the shield of the details related to the Ebgo Garcia from the court.

“What is the world we live in,” Shinis asked in disbelief more than two hours after the procedures. “What kind of legal world do we live in?”

It broke out several times with the lawyers of the Ministry of Justice because of their assertion that Abugo Garcia was legally detained and deported.

Judge Kagan settles on Trump’s lawyer in the main case: “Every court ruled against you”

“It was legally detained? No, it wasn’t!” Judge Shinis objected. “There was no arrangement for removal, and there was no order to remove – there was nothing.”

Justice’s lawyer Jonathan Gwen has again cut off when he tried to continue in a different argument. I told him: “You didn’t even respond to what I just said.” “The lawyer for the Ministry of National Security came in the first hearing and confirmed that there is no legal basis for the arrest of Abeerigo Garcia.”

“Why do we skip this – as part of the misconduct in the issue, in light of the pattern currently facing it on this day?” I asked, in disbelief.

For at least 30 seconds, the courtroom fell completely silent.

The judge said that it would issue an order later on Friday to determine the next steps, after the two sides gathered to a closed part of the case.

Shenis, which, despite her escalating frustrations, appears to be more likely to give the government another extension of the deadline, described the hearing that lasted for hours as a “frustrating and deadly horse”.

At one time, it reprimanded the Ministry of Justice for its attempt to summon the privilege of the state’s secrets through a footnote to a file in a separate case before a different court, noting that this will not pass in the courtroom.

Most of the plenary session was characterized by similar sharp exchanges about whether the Trump administration has taken any steps to comply with the court’s orders to facilitate the return of Abigo Garcia – a point that Shinis has already been settled by both the court and the Supreme Court last month.

At another controversial moment, she laughed at a clear lack of confirmation due to the lack of evidence and disclosure of the government. “I can’t calculate the number of” I do not know “my wonderful book and I have heard.”

Federal judge James Boasberg finds a possible reason for Trump’s contract to contempt for deportations

The government has so far refused to facilitate its return to the United States, despite the orders of the court and the ruling of the Supreme Court. (Fox News Digital – Breanne Deppisch)

Shinis told government lawyers that they did not provide her with a sufficient testimony to summon the privilege of the state secrets – which the Trump administration confirmed in this case to protect sensitive diplomatic and external policy issues to be public in the court.

He pointed to the previous acceptance of the Trump administration, Shinis also said that Abugo Garcia had been removed from the United States “without legal authority.”

“I confessed to that. There is a testimony of witnesses,” she said. Any attempt to review this “will be very difficult.”

“With respect, your honor, it was legally removed.”

“No,” Shinis’s unbelievable return. “It was removed illegally.”

“His removal from the United States was legal.”

“Well no – no, it was not the case,” Shinis was clearly surprised.

Trump’s remarks can return his bite in the battle to deport Aberigo Garcia

The judge in the case ordered both sides of the court on Friday, May 16, 2025 to hear from Trump officials who seek to summon the privileges of the state secrets. (Fox News Digital – Breanne Deppisch)

“Because there is actually [Immigration and Naturalization Act]He says that if the United States chooses to remove someone to a third country, there is an operation. congress has determined this process, the executive authority should follow this process. She said: “Therefore, it was not determined whether the removal to a third country will be appropriate, and that is why the Supreme Court ruled the way it did.”

She said in the end, she said that the government may have additional time to provide additional ads to allow it to search for the privilege of the state’s secrets.

However, she said that she should “indicate” that the illegal removal of Parisia from the United States is “an excessive result.”

“He was mistakenly removed. It was sent to El Salvador when there was a notice of blocking the removal, and this was not legal.”

Prosecutors indicated that the government described 1140 documents related to the I Abro Garcia case as distinctive – but in contrast to that, only 164 documents were sent – 132 of which were copies of their court files and sent them again.

Click for the Fox News app

“Your honor, life in balance,” said Apierigo Garcia’s lawyers, urging the court to move faster.

Shinis previously criticized the administration for its failure to comply with the court’s requests to obtain information in the case-accusing those responsible for a few pages of eight pages from providing “mysterious, void and incomplete responses that it said” showed “intentional and bad faith in the discovery obligations.”