US Supreme Court Upholds Order to Facilitate Return of Wrongfully Deported Salvadoran

 Washington, April 10, 2025 – The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a federal judge’s order requiring the Trump administration to assist in bringing back Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man erroneously deported to El Salvador, while seeking clarification on the scope of the directive. The decision underscores tensions between judicial authority and executive powers in matters of immigration and foreign relations.

On March 15, Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident with a valid work permit since 2019, was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and deported to El Salvador on a flight that also carried alleged Venezuelan gang members. His removal prompted a lawsuit from Abrego Garcia and his family, challenging the legality of the action. Last week, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the administration to “facilitate and effectuate” his return, a ruling the Supreme Court reviewed following an appeal from the Justice Department.

In an unsigned opinion, the Supreme Court affirmed that Judge Xinis’ order “properly requires the government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.” However, the court found the term “effectuate” ambiguous, noting it could exceed judicial authority. The justices instructed Xinis to clarify her directive, emphasizing “due regard for the deference owed to the executive branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.”

The court also directed the administration to provide transparency, stating it “should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps.”

Justice Department lawyers had argued that requiring the administration to “effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return infringed on presidential powers over foreign relations, asserting, “The United States does not control the sovereign nation of El Salvador, nor can it compel El Salvador to follow a federal judge’s bidding.” They further alleged, without substantiation, that Abrego Garcia was linked to the MS-13 gang—a claim his legal team has firmly denied.

Abrego Garcia, married to a U.S. citizen and raising a U.S.-citizen child alongside two stepchildren, has no criminal record, according to his attorneys. His detention and deportation, which occurred without a warrant, have drawn sharp criticism. The Supreme Court’s three liberal justices—Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—issued a separate statement agreeing with the decision but expressing dismay at the administration’s stance. Justice Sotomayor wrote, “To this day, the government has cited no basis in law for Abrego Garcia’s warrantless arrest, his removal to El Salvador, or his confinement in a Salvadoran prison. Nor could it.” She added that the administration had sought “an order from this court permitting it to leave Abrego Garcia, a husband and father without a criminal record, in a Salvadoran prison for no reason recognized by the law.”

The case highlights broader debates over immigration enforcement and judicial oversight, particularly under the Trump administration’s high-profile deportation policies. With a 6-3 conservative majority on the court, the ruling balances deference to executive authority with accountability for acknowledged errors. As Judge Xinis revises her order, Abrego Garcia’s family awaits resolution, hoping for his swift return to Maryland.