Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Deadline Legal Blog-Judge cites Abrego in ordering Trump administration to facilitate return of Venezuelans
Washington’s chief federal trial judge is still seeking to hold the government to account for one of its most flagrant legal violations in Trump’s second term.
Judge cites Abrego in ordering Trump administration to facilitate return of Venezuelans
— Donna898 (@donna-f898.bsky.social) 2026-02-14T18:20:27.717Z
Washington’s chief federal trial judge is still seeking to hold the government to account for one of its most flagrant legal violations in Trump’s second term.
https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/kilmar-abrego-garcia-judge-boasberg-trump-return-venezuelans
Take the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom the Trump administration illegally sent from the U.S. to El Salvador and, only after months of resistance, complied with a Maryland judge’s order to facilitate his return.
In the latest example of a judge recognizing that rights are only as good as their remedies, Washington’s chief federal trial judge cited Abrego’s case to justify an order for the government to facilitate the return of Venezuelans who were illegally sent to El Salvador in March under the 18th-century Alien Enemies Act.
While it’s unclear what will come of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s order in practical terms, it stands out for its plain reiteration of the government’s lawlessness and the understanding that that lawlessness can’t go unnoticed, or unacted upon.
Boasberg, who is D.C.’s chief district judge, began his seven-page opinion and order by noting that he had previously found that the government denied due process to those Venezuelans when it deported them “in defiance of this Court’s Order.” The Obama-appointed judge reminds the reader that we’re talking about official lawbreaking from the beginning......
That’s what led him to cite Abrego’s case in similarly taking the step of ordering the government “to facilitate the return from third countries of those Plaintiffs who so desire.” In this context, “third countries” are ones outside of Venezuela and the U.S., with Venezuela exempted due to foreign-affairs sensitivities that the U.S. has asserted after its abduction of leader Nicolás Maduro from that country.
But the judge noted that plaintiffs in third countries and in Venezuela can still file court papers seeking to show that Trump’s proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act was unlawful and that they don’t qualify under it in any event.
Boasberg wrote that he was “mindful of the flagrancy of the Government’s violations of the deportees’ due-process rights that landed Plaintiffs in this situation,” so he “refuses to let them languish in the solution-less mire Defendants propose.”
As for the potentially limited practical effects, the judge noted that anyone who gets back to the U.S. will be taken into custody pending further litigation and could be deported again. He wrote that the plaintiffs’ lawyers were unable to say how many of the 137 deported Venezuelans were still in that country and how many want to press their claims, but the lawyers said at least a handful do.
Whatever comes of the ruling — and there’s every reason to think that Boasberg will enforce it to the greatest extent he can — it stands for a crucial principle. If the government didn’t have to right its wrongs, the judge wrote, it “could simply remove people from the United States without providing any process and then, once they were in a foreign country, deny them any right to return for a hearing or opportunity to present their case from abroad.”.
In the latest example of a judge recognizing that rights are only as good as their remedies, Washington’s chief federal trial judge cited Abrego’s case to justify an order for the government to facilitate the return of Venezuelans who were illegally sent to El Salvador in March under the 18th-century Alien Enemies Act.
While it’s unclear what will come of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s order in practical terms, it stands out for its plain reiteration of the government’s lawlessness and the understanding that that lawlessness can’t go unnoticed, or unacted upon.
Boasberg, who is D.C.’s chief district judge, began his seven-page opinion and order by noting that he had previously found that the government denied due process to those Venezuelans when it deported them “in defiance of this Court’s Order.” The Obama-appointed judge reminds the reader that we’re talking about official lawbreaking from the beginning......
That’s what led him to cite Abrego’s case in similarly taking the step of ordering the government “to facilitate the return from third countries of those Plaintiffs who so desire.” In this context, “third countries” are ones outside of Venezuela and the U.S., with Venezuela exempted due to foreign-affairs sensitivities that the U.S. has asserted after its abduction of leader Nicolás Maduro from that country.
But the judge noted that plaintiffs in third countries and in Venezuela can still file court papers seeking to show that Trump’s proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act was unlawful and that they don’t qualify under it in any event.
Boasberg wrote that he was “mindful of the flagrancy of the Government’s violations of the deportees’ due-process rights that landed Plaintiffs in this situation,” so he “refuses to let them languish in the solution-less mire Defendants propose.”
As for the potentially limited practical effects, the judge noted that anyone who gets back to the U.S. will be taken into custody pending further litigation and could be deported again. He wrote that the plaintiffs’ lawyers were unable to say how many of the 137 deported Venezuelans were still in that country and how many want to press their claims, but the lawyers said at least a handful do.
Whatever comes of the ruling — and there’s every reason to think that Boasberg will enforce it to the greatest extent he can — it stands for a crucial principle. If the government didn’t have to right its wrongs, the judge wrote, it “could simply remove people from the United States without providing any process and then, once they were in a foreign country, deny them any right to return for a hearing or opportunity to present their case from abroad.”.
