Federal judge confirmed what we knew all along, Trump admin engaged in 'vindictive' prosecution against Abrego Garcia

[bigtree]

Senator Chris Van Hollen @ChrisVanHollen
Today, a federal judge determined what we've known all along, the Trump admin was engaged in a vindictive prosecution against Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

This is a win for all our rights & the Constitution.


____U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw ruled that the Justice Department's prosecution of Abrego Garcia was "vindictive," finding that the government would not have brought the case had he not challenged his deportation.

"Then-Attorney General Robert H. Jackson warned his fellow prosecutors long ago of the danger of picking the person first and the crime second," Crenshaw wrote at the top of the 32-page ruling. "That is the situation here."

In his ruling, Crenshaw said the record did "not explain the Government's change in position to remove Abrego and not prosecute him to then prosecute and not remove him," adding that a "retaliatory taint" kicked off the renewed investigation.

The judge also scrutinized the role of senior Justice Department officials, writing that statements by then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is now acting attorney general, and actions by Associate Deputy Attorney General Aakash Singh raised questions about the decision to reopen the investigation and seek an indictment.

"The objective credible evidence shows that Main Justice was involved in the investigation before McGuire," Crenshaw wrote, referring to Robert McGuire, the U.S. attorney who led the prosecution.

Crenshaw added that Singh's involvement "touched on everything from the timing of the indictment to the substance of the potential charges."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/judge-tosses-kilmar-abrego-garcia-charges-calls-trump-administration-prosecution-vindictive/ar-AA23QBpi

CONCLUSION: judge's ruling

"What the Government has chosen not to address is as telling as what it has. The Government’s posthearing brief mentions Blanche once, in a parenthetical to McGuire’s testimony. It mentions the Supreme Court’s ruling once, in a footnote. . It mentions Singh eleven times, framing him as the recipient of McGuire’s updates and ignoring his close, continuous, and substantive oversight. (Id. at 16 (insinuating that communications were “a one-way street” from McGuire to Singh)). The Government does not mention Schrader’s recommendation against charging Abrego at all. The reopening of the closed HSI investigation is the source of the vindictiveness. Blanche’s public statements about the investigation and Singh’s involvement tie Main Justice to the reopened investigation and the indictment. After the indictment became reality, the Government ignores McGuire’s testimony that Main Justice caused Abrego’s return to the United States, as the District of Maryland had long required. The Government’s rebuttal to the presumption of vindictiveness does not engage with that evidence. As a matter of logic, the Government cannot rebut a presumption when it does not address the evidence supporting the presumption.

“[A] prosecutor’s exercise of coercive power must be impartial . . . [,] evenhanded . . . [,] [and] applied without favoritism or bias . . . .”. Then-Attorney General Robert H. Jackson cautioned that when “the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that [is] the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power ....The evidence before this Court sadly reflects an abuse of prosecuting power.

The Court does not reach its conclusion lightly. The objective evidence here shows that, absent Abrego’s successful lawsuit challenging his removal to El Salvador, the Government would not have brought this prosecution. The Executive Branch closed its investigation on the November 2022 traffic stop. Only after Abrego succeeded in vindicating his rights did the Executive Branch reopen that investigation. What the Government labels as “new evidence” was not new as a matter of law. The prosecutor’s subjective good faith does not cure the retaliatory taint. Absent Blanche’s tainted investigation, Agent Saoud would not have called McGuire, Singh would not have brought him into the fold, and McGuire would not have sought an indictment against Abrego. The indictment then provided the Executive Branch cover to comply with Judge Xinis’ order to facilitate Abrego’s return to the United States as soon as possible.

Abrego’s motion to dismiss the indictment must be granted."

WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.tnmd.104622/gov.uscourts.tnmd.104622.312.0.pdf


...one thing that I'd like folks to understand is that this isn't just about this one fellow from my state.

Trump's cabal has figured out that the lever to loosening ALL Americans' grip on our country is first found in tearing vulnerable brown-skinned people from whatever roots we once believed we had in this nation and gambling that the antipathies republicans and others have generated in this nation against people who are literally the backbone of our economy - insisting against widely available evidence that they are some type of economic drag, instead of an overall economic benefit in the money they spend and the jobs and roles they perform in our society - hoping that Americans will look the other way as our government both subverts our constitution (which doesn't restrict benefits to 'citizens'), and bastardizes our values.

Abraham Lincoln, in a speech in Edwardsville, Illinois on 09-11-1858:

"Familiarize yourselves with the chains of bondage and you prepare your own limbs to wear them. Accustomed to trample on the rights of others, you have lost the genius of your own independence and become the fit subjects of the first cunning tyrant who rises among you."

[vapor2]

1. EVERYTHING this goons do is vindictive.....EVERYTHING

[malaise]

2. Duh!

Rec

[Qutzupalotl]

3. Retaliatory Taint is another good nickname for TSF.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

4. Deadline Legal Blog-Judge dismisses Kilmar Abrego Garcia's criminal indictment as vindictive by Trump DOJ

A judge found that Abrego wouldn’t have been prosecuted if he hadn’t brought a successful lawsuit challenging his removal to El Salvador.

Trump administration’s efforts “to create a boogeyman” FAILS BIGLY

Judge dismisses Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s criminal indictment as vindictive by Trump DOJ

Garcia should be entitled to millions from Trump’s slush fund
Just Sayin’

— Anti-Trumpism (@forabettertomorrow.bsky.social) 2026-05-22T21:29:15.523Z

https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/judge-dismisses-kilmar-abrego-garcias-criminal-indictment-trump-doj

A federal judge on Friday granted Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s motion to dismiss his indictment in Tennessee after Abrego argued that he was only charged by the Trump administration because he successfully challenged his illegal removal to El Salvador.

The Trump administration had resisted remedying that illegal removal for months before it finally brought him back in June 2025 to the United States, where it had criminal charges waiting for him.

“The objective evidence here shows that, absent Abrego’s successful lawsuit challenging his removal to El Salvador, the Government would not have brought this prosecution,” U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw wrote in his rare grant of such a motion, which the judge said he didn’t do lightly.

Vindictive prosecution motions are rarely granted but have been brought by several defendants targeted by the administration in President Donald Trump’s revenge-themed second term.....

“The Executive Branch closed its investigation on the November 2022 traffic stop,” Crenshaw wrote Friday, adding, “Only after Abrego succeeded in vindicating his rights did the Executive Branch reopen that investigation.”

In his ruling, the judge referred to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s investigation as “tainted.” Crenshaw wrote that instead of investigating the November 2022 traffic stop to identify who was responsible for the human smuggling, “Blanche started the investigation to implicate Abrego. He did so to justify the Executive Branch’s decision to remove him to El Salvador.”

Abrego’s illegal removal and the prolonged fight over his return drew widespread attention last year.

I believe that Blanche will face disbarment due to this and other actions.