Prison officers stand guard at a cell block at maximum security penitentiary CECOT  on April 4, 2025 in Tecoluca, San Vicente, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Peña/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department is paying El Salvador $6 million to house hundreds of immigrants deported from the United States in an immense and brutal prison there, Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

But a U.S. law bars State’s financial support of “units of foreign security forces” — which can include military and law enforcement staff in prisons —  facing credible allegations of gross human rights violations. That has led those who wrote what’s known as the Leahy Law and enforced it for years to question the legality of the $6 million payment made as President Donald Trump carries out his campaign of mass deportation.

The Trump administration on March 15 sent 261 men to CECOT, after invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to apply to Venezuelan nationals 14 and older who are suspected members of the gang Tren de Aragua.

On March 30, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said another 17 nationals from El Salvador were sent to CECOT, again alleging gang ties. On Sunday, Rubio said 10 more men were sent to the prison in El Salvador, and noted how “the alliance between” the U.S. and El Salvador “has become an example for security and prosperity in our hemisphere.”

Tim Rieser, the main author of the Leahy Law while a longtime foreign policy aide to former U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said the $6 million payment for those migrants’ incarceration for up to a year is likely a violation of the law.

“Sending migrants who have not been charged or convicted of any crime to the maximum-security terrorism prison in El Salvador, where they have no access to lawyers or their families, where they have no rights of due process, and with no idea if they will ever be released, held in cruel and shockingly degrading conditions, would certainly appear to violate the Leahy Law,” Rieser told States Newsroom.

“I don’t think the Trump administration is upholding the Leahy Law or other laws that protect human rights,” he said.

Also deeply concerned is Charles Blaha, a former State Department official for 32 years who led the office responsible for vetting the Leahy Law worldwide, the Office of Security and Human Rights, from 2016 to 2023.

“CECOT is a facility that exposes prisoners to torture, and cruel, degrading, and inhumane treatment and punishment,” Blaha said in an interview. “Under the Leahy Law, this should disqualify CECOT from receiving U.S. assistance.”

Trump has also expressed that he is open to sending U.S. citizens to CECOT.

“I love that,” he said. “I don’t know what the law says on that.”

El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele is scheduled to visit with Trump at the White House on Monday.

Trump administration says law followed

The Trump administration plans to keep using the mega-prison as deportations continue under the Alien Enemies Act, top officials such as U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have pledged. Noem visited the prison in March.

“This facility is one of the tools in our toolkits that we will use,” Noem said during her tour of CECOT.

The State Department has denied any potential violations.

“The Department is following all applicable laws related to foreign assistance, including the State Leahy Law,” a State Department spokesperson wrote in a statement to States Newsroom.

The spokesperson said the U.S. is engaged with El Salvador through foreign assistance to address unauthorized migration and human trafficking.

“As these countries continue to work with us in securing our borders and addressing illegal immigration, we will provide assistance as necessary in support of these collaborative efforts,” the spokesperson said. “Our goal is to ensure that our partners are well-equipped to handle the challenges they face, ultimately contributing to a more stable and secure region.”

The 1997 Leahy Law refers to two statutes – one applying to the State Department and one covering the Department of Defense – that prevent U.S. funds from being used for assistance to foreign security forces that have credible allegations of gross violations of human rights such as torture, extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance or rape. 

Payment origin

The exact agency within the State Department that is paying out the $6 million in funding to CECOT is unclear and is a source of interest among Democrats in Congress.

It is likely coming out of the State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, said Adam Isacson, director of defense oversight at the Washington Office of Latin America, a research and advocacy group that aims to advance human rights in North and South America.

INL, among other things, gives financial assistance to security forces and is subject to the Leahy Law, Isacson said.

The State Department did not answer detailed questions from States Newsroom as to whether the funds were coming from INL. 

“And even if Leahy doesn’t apply, the State Department has a duty to make sure that we’re not turning over people, even if they’re not our citizens, to places where they’ll be mistreated or tortured,” Blaha said.

The State Department’s Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor oversees an office that vets recipients of proposed foreign aid for potential gross human rights violations.

Fewer than 1% of requests are blocked after going through vetting through the Leahy Law compliance database. Those units that are blocked from funding are publicly posted on a case-by-case basis.

The most recent listing of publicly rejected units is from 2022, so there is no publicly available record of CECOT or the security units in charge of El Salvador’s prisons being vetted because the prison was built in 2023. However, experts say the country’s record of prison management and publicly available details about the mega-prison mean it should be on the latest version of the list.  

Beatings, use of electric shocks

The State Department’s 2023 Human Rights Report on El Salvador noted there were credible reports from human rights organizations “of abuse and mistreatment of detainees by prison guards.”

Groups cited in the report interviewed people who were released from prisons in El Salvador and “reported systemic abuse in the prison system, including beatings by guards and the use of electric shocks.”

“The coalition alleged the treatment of prisoners constituted torture,” according to the report.

The State Department in its report raised concerns about abusive physical conditions in El Salvador’s prisons, such as overcrowding.

While CECOT is not mentioned in the report by name, the report noted that El Salvador’s government opened a new facility in January 2023 to hold up to 40,000 detainees, which apparently is now CECOT.

No access to CECOT

No human rights group has had access to investigate the conditions of the CECOT prison, said Juanita Goebertus Estrada, the director of the Americas Division of Human Rights Watch.

Goebertus Estrada has studied El Salvador’s prison system since the country’s Congress allowed President Bukele to issue a state of emergency in 2022 that suspended due process. It’s led to 1.4% of the population, about 84,000 people, being incarcerated.

“We have no reason to believe that the (CECOT) conditions are not similar to those in the rest of the El Salvadorian prison system,” she said. “It’s administered by the same institution and the training of the guards is the same.”

She added that Human Rights Watch and other organizations have not documented anyone who is imprisoned at CECOT ever leaving. Additionally, attorneys and families are not allowed to visit.

“The government has explicitly said that this is a prison for the most reprehensible members of gangs, and that they’re going to rot there,” Goebertus Estrada said.

More than 300 people have died in prisons across El Salvador in the last three years, Goebertus Estrada said. 

That kind of record, WOLA’s Isacson said, is something that should trigger the Leahy Law.

“The Salvadoran units in charge of the prison system… you think would come up because of extraordinarily credible allegations of about 300 people dying in the prison system in the last three years,” Isacson said.

Enforcement up to Congress

Isacson said if the State Department’s Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor is not enforcing the Leahy Law, then “it would be up to members of Congress to raise this” concern and potentially pull funding for the bureau in a future appropriations bill.

The most recent warnings about violations of the Leahy Law have been tied to the start of the 2023 war in Gaza and the role of U.S. security assistance to Israel units. Thousands of Palestinians have died in the Israel-Hamas war.

“You had Israeli units, who would not have qualified, getting aid, and Democrats not really making any noise about it,” Isacson said. “The (Leahy) Law is mortally wounded.”

Democratic senators pressed DHS on April 8 to provide a copy of the contract between the U.S. and El Salvador. And House Democratic members, such as the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, are pushing for a congressional delegation to visit CECOT.

Former Rep. Matt Gaetz, Republican of Florida, visited the prison in July 2024, calling CECOT “the solution” and adding “the good ideas in El Salvador actually have legs and can go to other places and help other people be safe and secure and hopeful and prosperous.”  

U.S. citizens at CECOT?

El Salvador’s Bukele has become a key ally in Trump’s plans for mass deportations.

One of Rubio’s first visits to Latin America as secretary of State was to El Salvador. During that February trip, Rubio and Bukele talked about the possibility of detaining immigrants removed from the U.S. in El Salvador. Bukele also offered to imprison U.S. citizens.

“And in an extraordinary gesture never before extended by any country, President Bukele offered to house in his jails dangerous American criminals, including U.S. citizens and legal residents,” according to the State Department’s readout of the trip.

Noem said during an April 9 border security conference that the Trump administration will continue to carry out deportations under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 and maintain a strong partnership with El Salvador.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled April 7 that, for now, the Trump administration can continue use of the Alien Enemies Act, but said those subject to the proclamation must have due process, including court hearings.

The high court did not rule on the merits of using the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime law, when the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela. Until now, the Alien Enemies Act has only been used during the War of 1812, World War I and World War II.

The Venezuelan men who were sent to CECOT on March 15 under the wartime act, were not notified and or given due process, federal trial and appellate judges have noted. Lawyers for many of the Venezuelan men sent to El Salvador said their clients were not involved in gangs and instead either had no criminal record or were in the middle of asylum hearings before an immigration judge.

‘Cruelty is the point’

During the April 9 conference, Noem touted her meeting with Bukele and said the kind of partnership exemplified by the use of the prison would continue.

However, the Trump administration has taken the position that those at the CECOT prison are no longer in U.S. custody. In a high-profile case, the Supreme Court April 10 ruled that the Trump administration must “facilitate” the return of a wrongly deported Maryland man to the prison back to the U.S., but stopped short of requiring it.

“The idea of paying someone else to be your (Guantanamo Bay), is brand new,” Isacson said, referring to the U.S. Navy base in Cuba that houses foreign nationals accused of terrorism.

Noem visited CECOT after the Trump administration invoked the wartime law to send deportation flights to El Salvador. On camera Noem pointed behind her and warned the same would happen to immigrants who “commit crimes against the American people.”

Behind her were dozens of men who were stripped from the waist up, their tattoos visible behind bars.

Blaha was highly critical of Noem’s visit, where she took videos and pictures of the incarcerated men.

“Noem’s stunt epitomizes cruel, degrading, and inhumane treatment, which is why the administration loves it so much,” he said. “Sadly, the cruelty is the point with these guys.” 

A section of the U.S.-Mexico border wall near El Paso, Texas, on June 6, 2024. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump late Friday signed a memorandum directing several agencies to start militarizing a stretch of the southern border, an escalation of the administration’s use of the U.S. military amid its immigration crackdown.

The move, which The Washington Post first reported last month, could potentially put U.S. military members in direct contact with migrants, a possible violation of federal law.

The memo directs the Interior Department to allow the Defense Department to have jurisdiction over portions of federal land known as the Roosevelt Reservation, excluding any Native American reservations.

By creating a military buffer zone that stretches across the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona, California and New Mexico, it means any migrant crossing into the United States would be trespassing on a military base, therefore allowing active-duty troops to hold them until U.S. Border Patrol agents arrive.

National and military experts have raised concerns that giving control over the land to the military could violate the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law that generally prohibits the military from being used in domestic law enforcement.

The Friday memo instructs its “phased” implementation within 45 days, and says it could be expanded over time.

The memo is directed at the secretaries of the departments of Defense, Interior, Agriculture and Homeland Security.

“The complexity of the current situation requires that our military take a more direct role in securing our southern border than in the recent past,” according to the memo.

Friday’s announcement comes ahead of a report that is due to Trump by April 20 from the secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security with recommendations on whether or not to use the Insurrection Act of 1807 to aid in mass deportations.

The memo states: “At any time, the Secretary of Defense may extend activities under this memorandum to additional Federal lands along the southern border in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Assistant to the President and Homeland Security Advisor, and other executive departments and agencies as appropriate.”

The memo also says that it’s part of an executive order Trump earlier this year signed, “Clarifying the Military’s Role in Protecting the Territorial Integrity of the United States.”

That executive order is one of five that lay out the use of military forces within the U.S. borders and extend other executive powers to speed up the president’s immigration crackdown. 

Minister of Justice and Public Security Héctor Villatoro, right, accompanies Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, center, during a tour of the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

GREENBELT, MARYLAND — A federal judge Friday demanded daily reports from the Trump administration on how it is working to return an erroneously deported Maryland man from an El Salvador prison, despite objections from a Department of Justice lawyer who insisted the Trump administration could not immediately obey a U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

The Maryland judge’s order came after the high court Thursday night ruled the Trump administration must try to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, of Beltsville, but stopped short of requiring he be brought back from the notorious mega-prison.

The unsigned order from the Supreme Court said the district court also needs to clarify what it meant by saying the administration must “effectuate” the return of Abrego Garcia and the scope of that term is “unclear” and may exceed the district court’s authority.

Immigration officials admitted to an “administrative error” in the March 15 deportation of Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, despite protections from removal to his home country placed in 2019 by an immigration judge.

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of the District of Maryland grilled DOJ attorney Drew Ensign on where Abrego Garcia was currently and what steps President Donald Trump’s administration had taken to return him to the United States.

Ensign said he could not answer those questions and instead requested more time because the administration is currently “vetting what we can say” in court. 

He also objected to the requirement to submit daily updates.

Xinis, who earlier set a deadline, now expired, for the government to bring back Abrego Garcia, was critical of that response.

“The record as it stands is, despite this court’s directive … your clients have done nothing to facilitate the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia,” she said.

Xinis said she would schedule a hearing for early next week.

“We’re not going to slow walk this,” she said.

She continued to ask Ensign where Abrego Garcia was located.

Ensign said he had no information.

“It’s quite basic,” she said. “I’m not asking for state secrets.”

CECOT prison

Administration officials have said Abrego Garcia is in the custody of El Salvador’s government at the notorious prison known as Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.  The Beltsville man was apprehended by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement while driving his 5-year-old son home.

El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, is visiting the White House Monday to meet with President Donald Trump.

The attorney representing Abrego Garcia’s family, Simon Y. Sandoval-Moshenberg, said he would welcome daily updates on what the Trump administration is doing to facilitate his client’s return.

“It’s quite clear that the government is playing a game with their own lawyers,” he said, noting that this is the second time he has faced a DOJ attorney who claimed he had little information for Xinis.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said the attorney that originally argued on behalf of the government, Erez Reuveni, was placed on administrative leave for not “vigorously” defending the Trump administration.

Reuveni was candid with Xinis about how the Trump administration gave him no information as to why Abrego Garcia could not be returned, despite admitting to his deportation as a mistake.

Administration official rejects district court authority

Meanwhile, Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser, rejected the judge’s authority to require the return of Abrego Garcio in a social media post after the high court decision.

“SCOTUS rejected the lower court and made clear that a district court judge cannot exercise Article II foreign affairs powers. The illegal alien terrorist is in the custody and control of a sovereign foreign nation,” Miller wrote.

While the Trump administration has labeled Abrego Garcia as a member of the MS-13 gang, he has no criminal record in the U.S. or any country.

Before Friday’s hearing, the Department of Justice had sought a delay until Wednesday, which Xinis rejected in a searing order.

“First, the Defendants’ act of sending Abrego Garcia to El Salvador was wholly illegal from the moment it happened, and Defendants have been on notice of the same,” she wrote. “Second, the Defendants’ suggestion that they need time to meaningfully review a four-page (Supreme Court) Order that reaffirms this basic principle blinks at reality.”

She said the Department of Justice should have been making efforts to return Abrego Garcia after her decision last week ordering them to do so.

During the hearing she asked Ensign what progress the Trump administration made before the Supreme Court stayed the deadline she had set — so from April 4 until April 7.

Ensign said that the Trump administration was “not yet prepared to share that information.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem walks past reporters after doing a TV interview outside of the White House on March 10, 2025. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) 

WASHINGTON — Millions of immigrants in the country without legal authorization are required as of Friday to register with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security after a federal judge rejected advocacy groups’ request to pause the requirement.

They’ll also have to carry documents proving their registration.

The Thursday decision from U.S. District Court Judge Trevor Neil McFadden of the District of Columbia allows the Trump administration to issue hefty fines and potential prison sentences if those subject to the registration requirement do not comply.

McFadden, who was appointed by President Donald Trump in 2017, said in his ruling that the advocacy groups lacked legal standing – meaning they had not shown how they would be harmed by the requirement – to bring the suit.

“As organizations, many of their harms are too speculative, and they have failed to show that the Rule will erode their core missions,” McFadden wrote in his order.

In a statement, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem cheered the order.

“President Trump and I have a clear message for those in our country illegally: leave now. If you leave now, you may have the opportunity to return and enjoy our freedom and live the American dream,” Noem said.

The Migration Policy Institute, an immigration think tank, estimates that between 2.2 million and 3.2 million immigrants will have to register. The registration requirement could be a powerful tool in the Trump administration’s efforts to carry out mass deportations.

Registration requirements

DHS announced the new requirement in February. Under the rule, immigrants aged 14 and older who are required to register will need to carry registration documents at all times or risk potential prison terms or fines of up to $5,000.

Immigrants covered by the requirement must submit fingerprints and other biometric and personal information through an online application handled by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Once an application is approved, the agency will provide documentation that immigrants must carry at all times.

The suit, brought by immigration advocacy groups, argued the Trump administration violated proper rulemaking procedures in creating the application. The groups also warned in court documents that use of the application “will lead to racial profiling and the mistaken targeting of U.S. citizens.”

The registration requirement is authorized under a wartime act known as the Alien Registration Act of 1940 that was first used in World War II.

The requirement was rarely used until the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. During that time, any noncitizen males older than 16 who hailed from 25 Muslim-majority countries had to register with the U.S. government.

The program, the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, led to no terrorism convictions and was dissolved in 2016.

Under the requirement in place Friday, those who are required to register include immigrants who entered the U.S. without legal authority and Canadian visitors in the U.S. for more than 30 days.

Those who do not have to register include lawful permanent residents, immigrants with work visas or certain other visas and those in removal proceedings.  

Prisoners look out of their cell as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court Thursday ruled the Trump administration must “facilitate” the return of a Maryland man to the United States after he was wrongly deported to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador, but stopped short of requiring his return.

The high court said the Trump administration must try to bring back Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, of Beltsville, who was deported due to an “administrative error” admitted by the Trump administration.

The high court did not give the administration a date by which to return Abrego Garcia, saying the deadline in a District of Columbia court order has expired. The Supreme Court said the district court also needs to clarify what it meant by saying the administration must “effectuate” the return of Abrego Garcia and the scope of that term is “unclear” and may exceed the district court’s authority.

The Trump administration has repeatedly rejected retrieving Abrego Garcia from prison.  President Donald Trump and other high-ranking officials have alleged Abrego Garcia is a MS-13 gang member, but produced no evidence and have defended his deportation, despite admitting his removal was a mistake.  

“We don’t want them back,” Trump said April 8, referencing the case. “Can you imagine, you spend all of that time, energy and money on getting them out, and then you have a judge that sits there… (saying), he said, ‘No, bring him back.’”

It’s unclear how long Abrego Garcia will remain in the prison unless he is returned to the U.S., but El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele said based on the $6 million agreement between his country and the U.S., those men at the prison will remain there for at least a year.

Bukele is scheduled to meet with Trump at the White House Monday.

Effect on other prisoners

Thursday’s decision may have ramifications for the 238 Venezuelans who were deported to the same prison, Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

They were sent there under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a wartime law their attorneys say denied them due process because those subject to it were not able to challenge their removal in court.

The Supreme Court will allow, for now, the continued removal of Venezuelans under the Alien Enemies Act, but those subject to a presidential proclamation issued by Trump citing the Alien Enemies Act must be given notice of their removal under the wartime law and a court hearing. The court action also must be in the locations where they are incarcerated.

Arrested while driving son

The Abrego Garcia case garnered national attention when he was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement while driving his 5-year-old son home. Abrego Garcia was not charged with an offense, but was apprehended by ICE because his “status had changed.”

In 2019 Abrego Garcia was given a final order of removal, but an immigration judge granted him protection from removal to his home country because it was more “likely than not that he would be persecuted by gangs in El Salvador” if he was returned, according to court documents.

But on March 15 he was placed on one of three deportation flights to El Salvador.

The Trump administration has argued that Abrego Garcia is no longer in U.S. custody and therefore cannot be returned to the United States.

There is precedent from the U.S. government to return an immigrant accidentally deported, including U.S. citizens. Between fiscal year 2015 and fiscal year 2020, ICE accidentally deported 70 U.S. citizens who needed to be returned, according to a 2021 U.S. Government Accountability Office report.  

Minister of Justice and Public Security Héctor Villatoro, right, accompanies U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, center, during a tour of the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Federal judges in Texas and New York Wednesday temporarily halted the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 in parts of those two states where Venezuelans set for deportation are incarcerated.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed cases in the Southern District of New York and the Southern District of Texas, after the U.S. Supreme Court this week deemed challenges to the wartime law must be brought in the location of those subject to President Donald Trump’s proclamation on use of the act. The cases earlier were argued in the District of Columbia.

That Monday decision from the high court lifted a lower court’s order that barred the Trump administration from invoking the wartime law to deport any Venezuelan nationals 14 or older who are suspected gang members — but the justices also said unanimously that the Venezuelans must be allowed court hearings.

Texas Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr. issued a temporary restraining order to prevent the deportation of Venezuelans in the entire state of Texas under the Alien Enemies Act, as well as the facility where the three men who brought the case are currently detained, the El Valle Detention Center in Raymondville.

The restraining order from Rodriguez Jr. is in place until April 23. The order also states that the three Venezuelan men cannot be removed from the El Valle Detention Center, which is the same center from which the Trump administration on March 15 transferred those subject to the wartime law and placed them on a plane to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador.

New York order

The temporary restraining order from New York Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein that he plans to sign Wednesday would cover Venezuelans in the Southern District of New York, according to The Associated Press. That would include New York City, the boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx and Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan and Westchester counties.  

Two Venezuelans brought the suit in the Southern District of New York.

Hellerstein, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton, will hold an April 22 hearing to determine if the temporary restraining order should become a preliminary injunction. The ACLU is also pushing for a class certification.

The Supreme Court said this week it will allow, for now, the Trump administration to use the Alien Enemies Act, but those subject to the proclamation must be allowed to bring a challenge in court.

The original suit against the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act came from five men detained in Texas. The justices argued that the proper court venue should be where they were being detained in Texas rather than before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. 

More than 238 Venezuelans have been deported to the brutal prison, Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, known as CECOT.

Marylander’s case cited

Judge Rodriguez Jr., whom President Donald Trump appointed in 2017, in placing the temporary restraining order noted that anyone who is erroneously deported under the Alien Enemies Act potentially cannot be returned to the United States.

In his reasoning, he cited the Trump administration’s stance in a high-profile case that led to a Maryland man being sent to a prison in El Salvador by mistake.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to strike down a lower court’s order that officials return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia of Beltsville, Maryland, who had a 2019 court order barring his removal to El Salvador. On Monday the Supreme Court temporarily paused the deadline until the high court could make a full decision.

“Furthermore, if the United States erroneously removed an individual to another country based on the Proclamation, a substantial likelihood exists that the individual could not be returned to the United States,” Rodriguez Jr. wrote.

A hearing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in the Brownsville division, is set for Friday 1:30 p.m. Central. 

Rodriguez said of the upcoming Friday hearing, “the Court will consider whether to extend the temporary restraining order or issue other forms of emergency relief.”

Jennifer Vasquez Sura, left, and Congressional Hispanic Chair Adriano Espaillat, a New York Democrat, center, talk with Democratic Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, right, after a press conference calling for the return of Vasquez Sura's husband, who was erroneously deported. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Jennifer Vasquez Sura has a message for her husband, who was erroneously deported to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador by the Trump administration.

“I’m still fighting for you,” she said during a Thursday press conference with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Maryland Democratic lawmakers who are demanding the Trump administration return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to the United States.

Abrego Garcia, a national of El Salvador with deportation protections, was not charged with any offense but was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement March 12 due to a “change in status.”

Trump officials have admitted his removal on March 15 to the Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, was a mistake, but have stood by their decision.

“This so-called administrative error has destroyed my family’s happiness, my children’s innocence,” Vasquez Sura said, her voice shaking as she took small breaks before continuing to read her statement.

Pleas to president of El Salvador

The chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Adriano Espaillat, said he is writing a letter to El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele to ask for Abrego Garcia’s release as well as request for a congressional delegation to visit CECOT.

Bukele is scheduled to meet with President Donald Trump at the White House April 14. Espaillat, a New York Democrat, said if he does not receive a response from Bukele, he will ask for a response from Bukele when he visits the White House.

“We don’t know his condition,” Espaillat said of Abrego Garcia. “The family deserves to know his condition, and if they don’t tell us, we will visit the prison ourselves.”

Democratic Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen and Democratic Rep. Glenn Ivey, whose district includes the family’s home in Beltsville, criticized the Trump administration for not only accidentally deporting Abrego Garcia, but labeling him as a MS-13 gang member, despite his lack of a criminal record in any country, including the U.S.

“He was whisked off without any due process, and is now in a torturous … jail in El Salvador,” Van Hollen said.

Senators send letter

In 2019 Abrego Garcia was given removal orders to his home country. He was granted protections from removal by an immigration judge because it was more “likely than not that he would be persecuted by gangs in El Salvador” if he were returned, according to court documents.

On Tuesday, two dozen Senate Democrats sent a letter to U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, demanding  Abrego Garcia be returned to the U.S.

The Trump administration was ordered by a federal judge to return Abrego Garcia by Monday, and while the order was unanimously held up by a panel of judges on an appeals court, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily paused the deadline to return Abrego Garcia.

The high court will make a full decision on whether or not the Trump administration will be required to bring Abrego Garcia back to the U.S. 

Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, speaks during her confirmation hearing before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Capitol Hill on Jan. 17, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Eric Thayer/Getty Images)

This story was updated at 10:16 a.m. EDT on April 9.

WASHINGTON — Two dozen Democratic senators Tuesday demanded the Trump administration return to the United States a Maryland father who was deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador by mistake.

Immigration officials admitted to an “administrative error” in the March 15 deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, despite protections from removal to his home country placed in 2019 by an immigration judge.

“Your unwillingness to immediately rectify this ‘administrative error’ is unacceptable,” according to the letter addressed to U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Todd Lyons, acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It was led by Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen.

DHS did not respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.

Court battle

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday temporarily paused a lower court order that required the Trump administration to return Abrego Garcia from the prison known as Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

A full decision by the high court on whether the Trump administration would be required to return him is expected this week, and it could have implications for the more than 250 men who have been taken to the prison.

The Trump administration has argued that Abrego Garcia is no longer in U.S. custody, despite paying El Salvador $6 million to detain him, along with other immigrants deported.

Attorney General Pam Bondi spoke with reporters Tuesday outside the White House, and said she did not agree with the lower or appeals court orders to require the U.S. to return Abrego Garcia.

“We believe he should stay where he is,” she said.

Bondi also placed the DOJ attorney who argued on behalf of the Trump administration, Erez Reuveni, on indefinite administrative leave over the weekend.

‘Need for due process’

An appeals court Monday unanimously upheld an order by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis that the administration return Abrego Garcia to the U.S. by midnight Monday.

The 24 Democratic senators and one independent argued the Trump administration should comply with the order by Xinis.

“The Administration’s mass deportation agenda does not transcend immigration law or the need for due process,” according to the letter.

“And when the Administration makes a mistake as severe as sending an individual with protected status to a foreign prison, it cannot simply shrug off responsibility and allege that there is nothing it can do to reunite him with his wife and child, who are American citizens,” according to the letter.

The letter also requires Noem and ICE to answer several questions and return answers by April 22.

The senators ask why the agency and ICE are not working to return a wrongly deported individual, as the agencies have done so in the past and why Trump officials like the vice president and White House press secretary continue to label Abrego Garcia, of Beltsville, as a gang member without evidence.

The letter also asks for a copy of the contract agreement between El Salvador and the U.S. to detain the immigrants at CECOT.

List of senators

The 24 Senate Democrats on the letter besides Van Hollen included Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed of Rhode Island; Peter Welch of Vermont; Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla of California; Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey of Massachusetts; Richard Durbin and Tammy Duckworth of Illinois; Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut; Cory Booker of New Jersey; Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire; Tim Kaine and Mark Warner of Virginia; Christopher Coons of Delaware; Mazie Hirono and Brian Schatz of Hawaii; Ron Wyden and Jeffrey Merkley of Oregon; Martin Heinrich of New Mexico; Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland; Gary Peters of Michigan; and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont also signed the letter. 

 

Prison officers stand guard at a cell block at maximum security penitentiary CECOT  on April 4, 2025 in Tecoluca, San Vicente, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Peña/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department is paying El Salvador $6 million to house hundreds of immigrants deported from the United States in an immense and brutal prison there, Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

But a U.S. law bars State’s financial support of “units of foreign security forces” — which can include military and law enforcement staff in prisons —  facing credible allegations of gross human rights violations. That has led those who wrote what’s known as the Leahy Law and enforced it for years to question the legality of the $6 million payment made as President Donald Trump carries out his campaign of mass deportation.

The Trump administration on March 15 sent 261 men to CECOT, after invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to apply to Venezuelan nationals 14 and older who are suspected members of the gang Tren de Aragua.

On March 30, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said another 17 nationals from El Salvador were sent to CECOT, again alleging gang ties. On Sunday, Rubio said 10 more men were sent to the prison in El Salvador, and noted how “the alliance between” the U.S. and El Salvador “has become an example for security and prosperity in our hemisphere.”

Tim Rieser, the main author of the Leahy Law while a longtime foreign policy aide to former U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said the $6 million payment for those migrants’ incarceration for up to a year is likely a violation of the law.

“Sending migrants who have not been charged or convicted of any crime to the maximum-security terrorism prison in El Salvador, where they have no access to lawyers or their families, where they have no rights of due process, and with no idea if they will ever be released, held in cruel and shockingly degrading conditions, would certainly appear to violate the Leahy Law,” Rieser told States Newsroom.

“I don’t think the Trump administration is upholding the Leahy Law or other laws that protect human rights,” he said.

Also deeply concerned is Charles Blaha, a former State Department official for 32 years who led the office responsible for vetting the Leahy Law worldwide, the Office of Security and Human Rights, from 2016 to 2023.

“CECOT is a facility that exposes prisoners to torture, and cruel, degrading, and inhumane treatment and punishment,” Blaha said in an interview. “Under the Leahy Law, this should disqualify CECOT from receiving U.S. assistance.”

Trump has also expressed that he is open to sending U.S. citizens to CECOT.

“I love that,” he said. “I don’t know what the law says on that.”

El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele is scheduled to visit with Trump at the White House on Monday.

Trump administration says law followed

The Trump administration plans to keep using the mega-prison as deportations continue under the Alien Enemies Act, top officials such as U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have pledged. Noem visited the prison in March.

“This facility is one of the tools in our toolkits that we will use,” Noem said during her tour of CECOT.

The State Department has denied any potential violations.

“The Department is following all applicable laws related to foreign assistance, including the State Leahy Law,” a State Department spokesperson wrote in a statement to States Newsroom.

The spokesperson said the U.S. is engaged with El Salvador through foreign assistance to address unauthorized migration and human trafficking.

“As these countries continue to work with us in securing our borders and addressing illegal immigration, we will provide assistance as necessary in support of these collaborative efforts,” the spokesperson said. “Our goal is to ensure that our partners are well-equipped to handle the challenges they face, ultimately contributing to a more stable and secure region.”

The 1997 Leahy Law refers to two statutes – one applying to the State Department and one covering the Department of Defense – that prevent U.S. funds from being used for assistance to foreign security forces that have credible allegations of gross violations of human rights such as torture, extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance or rape. 

Payment origin

The exact agency within the State Department that is paying out the $6 million in funding to CECOT is unclear and is a source of interest among Democrats in Congress.

It is likely coming out of the State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, said Adam Isacson, director of defense oversight at the Washington Office of Latin America, a research and advocacy group that aims to advance human rights in North and South America.

INL, among other things, gives financial assistance to security forces and is subject to the Leahy Law, Isacson said.

The State Department did not answer detailed questions from States Newsroom as to whether the funds were coming from INL. 

“And even if Leahy doesn’t apply, the State Department has a duty to make sure that we’re not turning over people, even if they’re not our citizens, to places where they’ll be mistreated or tortured,” Blaha said.

The State Department’s Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor oversees an office that vets recipients of proposed foreign aid for potential gross human rights violations.

Fewer than 1% of requests are blocked after going through vetting through the Leahy Law compliance database. Those units that are blocked from funding are publicly posted on a case-by-case basis.

The most recent listing of publicly rejected units is from 2022, so there is no publicly available record of CECOT or the security units in charge of El Salvador’s prisons being vetted because the prison was built in 2023. However, experts say the country’s record of prison management and publicly available details about the mega-prison mean it should be on the latest version of the list.  

Beatings, use of electric shocks

The State Department’s 2023 Human Rights Report on El Salvador noted there were credible reports from human rights organizations “of abuse and mistreatment of detainees by prison guards.”

Groups cited in the report interviewed people who were released from prisons in El Salvador and “reported systemic abuse in the prison system, including beatings by guards and the use of electric shocks.”

“The coalition alleged the treatment of prisoners constituted torture,” according to the report.

The State Department in its report raised concerns about abusive physical conditions in El Salvador’s prisons, such as overcrowding.

While CECOT is not mentioned in the report by name, the report noted that El Salvador’s government opened a new facility in January 2023 to hold up to 40,000 detainees, which apparently is now CECOT.

No access to CECOT

No human rights group has had access to investigate the conditions of the CECOT prison, said Juanita Goebertus Estrada, the director of the Americas Division of Human Rights Watch.

Goebertus Estrada has studied El Salvador’s prison system since the country’s Congress allowed President Bukele to issue a state of emergency in 2022 that suspended due process. It’s led to 1.4% of the population, about 84,000 people, being incarcerated.

“We have no reason to believe that the (CECOT) conditions are not similar to those in the rest of the El Salvadorian prison system,” she said. “It’s administered by the same institution and the training of the guards is the same.”

She added that Human Rights Watch and other organizations have not documented anyone who is imprisoned at CECOT ever leaving. Additionally, attorneys and families are not allowed to visit.

“The government has explicitly said that this is a prison for the most reprehensible members of gangs, and that they’re going to rot there,” Goebertus Estrada said.

More than 300 people have died in prisons across El Salvador in the last three years, Goebertus Estrada said. 

That kind of record, WOLA’s Isacson said, is something that should trigger the Leahy Law.

“The Salvadoran units in charge of the prison system… you think would come up because of extraordinarily credible allegations of about 300 people dying in the prison system in the last three years,” Isacson said.

Enforcement up to Congress

Isacson said if the State Department’s Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor is not enforcing the Leahy Law, then “it would be up to members of Congress to raise this” concern and potentially pull funding for the bureau in a future appropriations bill.

The most recent warnings about violations of the Leahy Law have been tied to the start of the 2023 war in Gaza and the role of U.S. security assistance to Israel units. Thousands of Palestinians have died in the Israel-Hamas war.

“You had Israeli units, who would not have qualified, getting aid, and Democrats not really making any noise about it,” Isacson said. “The (Leahy) Law is mortally wounded.”

Democratic senators pressed DHS on April 8 to provide a copy of the contract between the U.S. and El Salvador. And House Democratic members, such as the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, are pushing for a congressional delegation to visit CECOT.

Former Rep. Matt Gaetz, Republican of Florida, visited the prison in July 2024, calling CECOT “the solution” and adding “the good ideas in El Salvador actually have legs and can go to other places and help other people be safe and secure and hopeful and prosperous.”  

U.S. citizens at CECOT?

El Salvador’s Bukele has become a key ally in Trump’s plans for mass deportations.

One of Rubio’s first visits to Latin America as secretary of State was to El Salvador. During that February trip, Rubio and Bukele talked about the possibility of detaining immigrants removed from the U.S. in El Salvador. Bukele also offered to imprison U.S. citizens.

“And in an extraordinary gesture never before extended by any country, President Bukele offered to house in his jails dangerous American criminals, including U.S. citizens and legal residents,” according to the State Department’s readout of the trip.

Noem said during an April 9 border security conference that the Trump administration will continue to carry out deportations under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 and maintain a strong partnership with El Salvador.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled April 7 that, for now, the Trump administration can continue use of the Alien Enemies Act, but said those subject to the proclamation must have due process, including court hearings.

The high court did not rule on the merits of using the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime law, when the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela. Until now, the Alien Enemies Act has only been used during the War of 1812, World War I and World War II.

The Venezuelan men who were sent to CECOT on March 15 under the wartime act, were not notified and or given due process, federal trial and appellate judges have noted. Lawyers for many of the Venezuelan men sent to El Salvador said their clients were not involved in gangs and instead either had no criminal record or were in the middle of asylum hearings before an immigration judge.

‘Cruelty is the point’

During the April 9 conference, Noem touted her meeting with Bukele and said the kind of partnership exemplified by the use of the prison would continue.

However, the Trump administration has taken the position that those at the CECOT prison are no longer in U.S. custody. In a high-profile case, the Supreme Court April 10 ruled that the Trump administration must “facilitate” the return of a wrongly deported Maryland man to the prison back to the U.S., but stopped short of requiring it.

“The idea of paying someone else to be your (Guantanamo Bay), is brand new,” Isacson said, referring to the U.S. Navy base in Cuba that houses foreign nationals accused of terrorism.

Noem visited CECOT after the Trump administration invoked the wartime law to send deportation flights to El Salvador. On camera Noem pointed behind her and warned the same would happen to immigrants who “commit crimes against the American people.”

Behind her were dozens of men who were stripped from the waist up, their tattoos visible behind bars.

Blaha was highly critical of Noem’s visit, where she took videos and pictures of the incarcerated men.

“Noem’s stunt epitomizes cruel, degrading, and inhumane treatment, which is why the administration loves it so much,” he said. “Sadly, the cruelty is the point with these guys.” 

A section of the U.S.-Mexico border wall near El Paso, Texas, on June 6, 2024. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump late Friday signed a memorandum directing several agencies to start militarizing a stretch of the southern border, an escalation of the administration’s use of the U.S. military amid its immigration crackdown.

The move, which The Washington Post first reported last month, could potentially put U.S. military members in direct contact with migrants, a possible violation of federal law.

The memo directs the Interior Department to allow the Defense Department to have jurisdiction over portions of federal land known as the Roosevelt Reservation, excluding any Native American reservations.

By creating a military buffer zone that stretches across the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona, California and New Mexico, it means any migrant crossing into the United States would be trespassing on a military base, therefore allowing active-duty troops to hold them until U.S. Border Patrol agents arrive.

National and military experts have raised concerns that giving control over the land to the military could violate the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law that generally prohibits the military from being used in domestic law enforcement.

The Friday memo instructs its “phased” implementation within 45 days, and says it could be expanded over time.

The memo is directed at the secretaries of the departments of Defense, Interior, Agriculture and Homeland Security.

“The complexity of the current situation requires that our military take a more direct role in securing our southern border than in the recent past,” according to the memo.

Friday’s announcement comes ahead of a report that is due to Trump by April 20 from the secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security with recommendations on whether or not to use the Insurrection Act of 1807 to aid in mass deportations.

The memo states: “At any time, the Secretary of Defense may extend activities under this memorandum to additional Federal lands along the southern border in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Assistant to the President and Homeland Security Advisor, and other executive departments and agencies as appropriate.”

The memo also says that it’s part of an executive order Trump earlier this year signed, “Clarifying the Military’s Role in Protecting the Territorial Integrity of the United States.”

That executive order is one of five that lay out the use of military forces within the U.S. borders and extend other executive powers to speed up the president’s immigration crackdown. 

Minister of Justice and Public Security Héctor Villatoro, right, accompanies Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, center, during a tour of the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

GREENBELT, MARYLAND — A federal judge Friday demanded daily reports from the Trump administration on how it is working to return an erroneously deported Maryland man from an El Salvador prison, despite objections from a Department of Justice lawyer who insisted the Trump administration could not immediately obey a U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

The Maryland judge’s order came after the high court Thursday night ruled the Trump administration must try to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, of Beltsville, but stopped short of requiring he be brought back from the notorious mega-prison.

The unsigned order from the Supreme Court said the district court also needs to clarify what it meant by saying the administration must “effectuate” the return of Abrego Garcia and the scope of that term is “unclear” and may exceed the district court’s authority.

Immigration officials admitted to an “administrative error” in the March 15 deportation of Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, despite protections from removal to his home country placed in 2019 by an immigration judge.

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of the District of Maryland grilled DOJ attorney Drew Ensign on where Abrego Garcia was currently and what steps President Donald Trump’s administration had taken to return him to the United States.

Ensign said he could not answer those questions and instead requested more time because the administration is currently “vetting what we can say” in court. 

He also objected to the requirement to submit daily updates.

Xinis, who earlier set a deadline, now expired, for the government to bring back Abrego Garcia, was critical of that response.

“The record as it stands is, despite this court’s directive … your clients have done nothing to facilitate the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia,” she said.

Xinis said she would schedule a hearing for early next week.

“We’re not going to slow walk this,” she said.

She continued to ask Ensign where Abrego Garcia was located.

Ensign said he had no information.

“It’s quite basic,” she said. “I’m not asking for state secrets.”

CECOT prison

Administration officials have said Abrego Garcia is in the custody of El Salvador’s government at the notorious prison known as Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.  The Beltsville man was apprehended by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement while driving his 5-year-old son home.

El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, is visiting the White House Monday to meet with President Donald Trump.

The attorney representing Abrego Garcia’s family, Simon Y. Sandoval-Moshenberg, said he would welcome daily updates on what the Trump administration is doing to facilitate his client’s return.

“It’s quite clear that the government is playing a game with their own lawyers,” he said, noting that this is the second time he has faced a DOJ attorney who claimed he had little information for Xinis.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said the attorney that originally argued on behalf of the government, Erez Reuveni, was placed on administrative leave for not “vigorously” defending the Trump administration.

Reuveni was candid with Xinis about how the Trump administration gave him no information as to why Abrego Garcia could not be returned, despite admitting to his deportation as a mistake.

Administration official rejects district court authority

Meanwhile, Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser, rejected the judge’s authority to require the return of Abrego Garcio in a social media post after the high court decision.

“SCOTUS rejected the lower court and made clear that a district court judge cannot exercise Article II foreign affairs powers. The illegal alien terrorist is in the custody and control of a sovereign foreign nation,” Miller wrote.

While the Trump administration has labeled Abrego Garcia as a member of the MS-13 gang, he has no criminal record in the U.S. or any country.

Before Friday’s hearing, the Department of Justice had sought a delay until Wednesday, which Xinis rejected in a searing order.

“First, the Defendants’ act of sending Abrego Garcia to El Salvador was wholly illegal from the moment it happened, and Defendants have been on notice of the same,” she wrote. “Second, the Defendants’ suggestion that they need time to meaningfully review a four-page (Supreme Court) Order that reaffirms this basic principle blinks at reality.”

She said the Department of Justice should have been making efforts to return Abrego Garcia after her decision last week ordering them to do so.

During the hearing she asked Ensign what progress the Trump administration made before the Supreme Court stayed the deadline she had set — so from April 4 until April 7.

Ensign said that the Trump administration was “not yet prepared to share that information.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem walks past reporters after doing a TV interview outside of the White House on March 10, 2025. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) 

WASHINGTON — Millions of immigrants in the country without legal authorization are required as of Friday to register with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security after a federal judge rejected advocacy groups’ request to pause the requirement.

They’ll also have to carry documents proving their registration.

The Thursday decision from U.S. District Court Judge Trevor Neil McFadden of the District of Columbia allows the Trump administration to issue hefty fines and potential prison sentences if those subject to the registration requirement do not comply.

McFadden, who was appointed by President Donald Trump in 2017, said in his ruling that the advocacy groups lacked legal standing – meaning they had not shown how they would be harmed by the requirement – to bring the suit.

“As organizations, many of their harms are too speculative, and they have failed to show that the Rule will erode their core missions,” McFadden wrote in his order.

In a statement, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem cheered the order.

“President Trump and I have a clear message for those in our country illegally: leave now. If you leave now, you may have the opportunity to return and enjoy our freedom and live the American dream,” Noem said.

The Migration Policy Institute, an immigration think tank, estimates that between 2.2 million and 3.2 million immigrants will have to register. The registration requirement could be a powerful tool in the Trump administration’s efforts to carry out mass deportations.

Registration requirements

DHS announced the new requirement in February. Under the rule, immigrants aged 14 and older who are required to register will need to carry registration documents at all times or risk potential prison terms or fines of up to $5,000.

Immigrants covered by the requirement must submit fingerprints and other biometric and personal information through an online application handled by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Once an application is approved, the agency will provide documentation that immigrants must carry at all times.

The suit, brought by immigration advocacy groups, argued the Trump administration violated proper rulemaking procedures in creating the application. The groups also warned in court documents that use of the application “will lead to racial profiling and the mistaken targeting of U.S. citizens.”

The registration requirement is authorized under a wartime act known as the Alien Registration Act of 1940 that was first used in World War II.

The requirement was rarely used until the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. During that time, any noncitizen males older than 16 who hailed from 25 Muslim-majority countries had to register with the U.S. government.

The program, the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, led to no terrorism convictions and was dissolved in 2016.

Under the requirement in place Friday, those who are required to register include immigrants who entered the U.S. without legal authority and Canadian visitors in the U.S. for more than 30 days.

Those who do not have to register include lawful permanent residents, immigrants with work visas or certain other visas and those in removal proceedings.  

Prisoners look out of their cell as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court Thursday ruled the Trump administration must “facilitate” the return of a Maryland man to the United States after he was wrongly deported to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador, but stopped short of requiring his return.

The high court said the Trump administration must try to bring back Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, of Beltsville, who was deported due to an “administrative error” admitted by the Trump administration.

The high court did not give the administration a date by which to return Abrego Garcia, saying the deadline in a District of Columbia court order has expired. The Supreme Court said the district court also needs to clarify what it meant by saying the administration must “effectuate” the return of Abrego Garcia and the scope of that term is “unclear” and may exceed the district court’s authority.

The Trump administration has repeatedly rejected retrieving Abrego Garcia from prison.  President Donald Trump and other high-ranking officials have alleged Abrego Garcia is a MS-13 gang member, but produced no evidence and have defended his deportation, despite admitting his removal was a mistake.  

“We don’t want them back,” Trump said April 8, referencing the case. “Can you imagine, you spend all of that time, energy and money on getting them out, and then you have a judge that sits there… (saying), he said, ‘No, bring him back.’”

It’s unclear how long Abrego Garcia will remain in the prison unless he is returned to the U.S., but El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele said based on the $6 million agreement between his country and the U.S., those men at the prison will remain there for at least a year.

Bukele is scheduled to meet with Trump at the White House Monday.

Effect on other prisoners

Thursday’s decision may have ramifications for the 238 Venezuelans who were deported to the same prison, Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

They were sent there under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a wartime law their attorneys say denied them due process because those subject to it were not able to challenge their removal in court.

The Supreme Court will allow, for now, the continued removal of Venezuelans under the Alien Enemies Act, but those subject to a presidential proclamation issued by Trump citing the Alien Enemies Act must be given notice of their removal under the wartime law and a court hearing. The court action also must be in the locations where they are incarcerated.

Arrested while driving son

The Abrego Garcia case garnered national attention when he was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement while driving his 5-year-old son home. Abrego Garcia was not charged with an offense, but was apprehended by ICE because his “status had changed.”

In 2019 Abrego Garcia was given a final order of removal, but an immigration judge granted him protection from removal to his home country because it was more “likely than not that he would be persecuted by gangs in El Salvador” if he was returned, according to court documents.

But on March 15 he was placed on one of three deportation flights to El Salvador.

The Trump administration has argued that Abrego Garcia is no longer in U.S. custody and therefore cannot be returned to the United States.

There is precedent from the U.S. government to return an immigrant accidentally deported, including U.S. citizens. Between fiscal year 2015 and fiscal year 2020, ICE accidentally deported 70 U.S. citizens who needed to be returned, according to a 2021 U.S. Government Accountability Office report.  

Minister of Justice and Public Security Héctor Villatoro, right, accompanies U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, center, during a tour of the Terrorist Confinement Center, or CECOT, on March 26, 2025 in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Federal judges in Texas and New York Wednesday temporarily halted the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 in parts of those two states where Venezuelans set for deportation are incarcerated.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed cases in the Southern District of New York and the Southern District of Texas, after the U.S. Supreme Court this week deemed challenges to the wartime law must be brought in the location of those subject to President Donald Trump’s proclamation on use of the act. The cases earlier were argued in the District of Columbia.

That Monday decision from the high court lifted a lower court’s order that barred the Trump administration from invoking the wartime law to deport any Venezuelan nationals 14 or older who are suspected gang members — but the justices also said unanimously that the Venezuelans must be allowed court hearings.

Texas Judge Fernando Rodriguez Jr. issued a temporary restraining order to prevent the deportation of Venezuelans in the entire state of Texas under the Alien Enemies Act, as well as the facility where the three men who brought the case are currently detained, the El Valle Detention Center in Raymondville.

The restraining order from Rodriguez Jr. is in place until April 23. The order also states that the three Venezuelan men cannot be removed from the El Valle Detention Center, which is the same center from which the Trump administration on March 15 transferred those subject to the wartime law and placed them on a plane to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador.

New York order

The temporary restraining order from New York Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein that he plans to sign Wednesday would cover Venezuelans in the Southern District of New York, according to The Associated Press. That would include New York City, the boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx and Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan and Westchester counties.  

Two Venezuelans brought the suit in the Southern District of New York.

Hellerstein, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton, will hold an April 22 hearing to determine if the temporary restraining order should become a preliminary injunction. The ACLU is also pushing for a class certification.

The Supreme Court said this week it will allow, for now, the Trump administration to use the Alien Enemies Act, but those subject to the proclamation must be allowed to bring a challenge in court.

The original suit against the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act came from five men detained in Texas. The justices argued that the proper court venue should be where they were being detained in Texas rather than before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. 

More than 238 Venezuelans have been deported to the brutal prison, Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, known as CECOT.

Marylander’s case cited

Judge Rodriguez Jr., whom President Donald Trump appointed in 2017, in placing the temporary restraining order noted that anyone who is erroneously deported under the Alien Enemies Act potentially cannot be returned to the United States.

In his reasoning, he cited the Trump administration’s stance in a high-profile case that led to a Maryland man being sent to a prison in El Salvador by mistake.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to strike down a lower court’s order that officials return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia of Beltsville, Maryland, who had a 2019 court order barring his removal to El Salvador. On Monday the Supreme Court temporarily paused the deadline until the high court could make a full decision.

“Furthermore, if the United States erroneously removed an individual to another country based on the Proclamation, a substantial likelihood exists that the individual could not be returned to the United States,” Rodriguez Jr. wrote.

A hearing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in the Brownsville division, is set for Friday 1:30 p.m. Central. 

Rodriguez said of the upcoming Friday hearing, “the Court will consider whether to extend the temporary restraining order or issue other forms of emergency relief.”

Jennifer Vasquez Sura, left, and Congressional Hispanic Chair Adriano Espaillat, a New York Democrat, center, talk with Democratic Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, right, after a press conference calling for the return of Vasquez Sura's husband, who was erroneously deported. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Jennifer Vasquez Sura has a message for her husband, who was erroneously deported to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador by the Trump administration.

“I’m still fighting for you,” she said during a Thursday press conference with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Maryland Democratic lawmakers who are demanding the Trump administration return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to the United States.

Abrego Garcia, a national of El Salvador with deportation protections, was not charged with any offense but was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement March 12 due to a “change in status.”

Trump officials have admitted his removal on March 15 to the Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, was a mistake, but have stood by their decision.

“This so-called administrative error has destroyed my family’s happiness, my children’s innocence,” Vasquez Sura said, her voice shaking as she took small breaks before continuing to read her statement.

Pleas to president of El Salvador

The chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Adriano Espaillat, said he is writing a letter to El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele to ask for Abrego Garcia’s release as well as request for a congressional delegation to visit CECOT.

Bukele is scheduled to meet with President Donald Trump at the White House April 14. Espaillat, a New York Democrat, said if he does not receive a response from Bukele, he will ask for a response from Bukele when he visits the White House.

“We don’t know his condition,” Espaillat said of Abrego Garcia. “The family deserves to know his condition, and if they don’t tell us, we will visit the prison ourselves.”

Democratic Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen and Democratic Rep. Glenn Ivey, whose district includes the family’s home in Beltsville, criticized the Trump administration for not only accidentally deporting Abrego Garcia, but labeling him as a MS-13 gang member, despite his lack of a criminal record in any country, including the U.S.

“He was whisked off without any due process, and is now in a torturous … jail in El Salvador,” Van Hollen said.

Senators send letter

In 2019 Abrego Garcia was given removal orders to his home country. He was granted protections from removal by an immigration judge because it was more “likely than not that he would be persecuted by gangs in El Salvador” if he were returned, according to court documents.

On Tuesday, two dozen Senate Democrats sent a letter to U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, demanding  Abrego Garcia be returned to the U.S.

The Trump administration was ordered by a federal judge to return Abrego Garcia by Monday, and while the order was unanimously held up by a panel of judges on an appeals court, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily paused the deadline to return Abrego Garcia.

The high court will make a full decision on whether or not the Trump administration will be required to bring Abrego Garcia back to the U.S. 

Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, speaks during her confirmation hearing before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Capitol Hill on Jan. 17, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Eric Thayer/Getty Images)

This story was updated at 10:16 a.m. EDT on April 9.

WASHINGTON — Two dozen Democratic senators Tuesday demanded the Trump administration return to the United States a Maryland father who was deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador by mistake.

Immigration officials admitted to an “administrative error” in the March 15 deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, despite protections from removal to his home country placed in 2019 by an immigration judge.

“Your unwillingness to immediately rectify this ‘administrative error’ is unacceptable,” according to the letter addressed to U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Todd Lyons, acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It was led by Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen.

DHS did not respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.

Court battle

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday temporarily paused a lower court order that required the Trump administration to return Abrego Garcia from the prison known as Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

A full decision by the high court on whether the Trump administration would be required to return him is expected this week, and it could have implications for the more than 250 men who have been taken to the prison.

The Trump administration has argued that Abrego Garcia is no longer in U.S. custody, despite paying El Salvador $6 million to detain him, along with other immigrants deported.

Attorney General Pam Bondi spoke with reporters Tuesday outside the White House, and said she did not agree with the lower or appeals court orders to require the U.S. to return Abrego Garcia.

“We believe he should stay where he is,” she said.

Bondi also placed the DOJ attorney who argued on behalf of the Trump administration, Erez Reuveni, on indefinite administrative leave over the weekend.

‘Need for due process’

An appeals court Monday unanimously upheld an order by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis that the administration return Abrego Garcia to the U.S. by midnight Monday.

The 24 Democratic senators and one independent argued the Trump administration should comply with the order by Xinis.

“The Administration’s mass deportation agenda does not transcend immigration law or the need for due process,” according to the letter.

“And when the Administration makes a mistake as severe as sending an individual with protected status to a foreign prison, it cannot simply shrug off responsibility and allege that there is nothing it can do to reunite him with his wife and child, who are American citizens,” according to the letter.

The letter also requires Noem and ICE to answer several questions and return answers by April 22.

The senators ask why the agency and ICE are not working to return a wrongly deported individual, as the agencies have done so in the past and why Trump officials like the vice president and White House press secretary continue to label Abrego Garcia, of Beltsville, as a gang member without evidence.

The letter also asks for a copy of the contract agreement between El Salvador and the U.S. to detain the immigrants at CECOT.

List of senators

The 24 Senate Democrats on the letter besides Van Hollen included Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed of Rhode Island; Peter Welch of Vermont; Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla of California; Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey of Massachusetts; Richard Durbin and Tammy Duckworth of Illinois; Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut; Cory Booker of New Jersey; Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire; Tim Kaine and Mark Warner of Virginia; Christopher Coons of Delaware; Mazie Hirono and Brian Schatz of Hawaii; Ron Wyden and Jeffrey Merkley of Oregon; Martin Heinrich of New Mexico; Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland; Gary Peters of Michigan; and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont also signed the letter. 

 

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem delivers remarks to staff at the department's Washington, D.C., headquarters on Jan. 28, 2025. (Photo by Manuel Balce Ceneta-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The IRS and Department of Homeland Security reached an agreement Monday to share tax information of immigrants who have final orders of removal to help immigration agents find and deport the immigrants, according to documents filed in court.

No information between the two agencies has been shared yet, according to the filings in federal court in the District of Columbia, but the partnership would impact more than 1 million immigrants with final removal orders, as the Trump administration carries out mass deportations of immigrants without permanent legal status.

According to a memorandum of understanding signed by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and submitted to the court, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials can ask the IRS to provide information about immigrants with orders of removal or immigrants involved in criminal investigations.

Some of that tax information includes sensitive details such as current addresses and information about child tax dependents.

It would be the first time the IRS shared sensitive tax information to carry out immigration enforcement.

In 2023, immigrants in the country without legal authority paid more than $89 billion in taxes, according to the left-leaning think tank the American Immigration Council.

In order to file taxes without a social security number, someone who is not a U.S. citizen would use an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number, or an ITIN. As of 2022, there were more than 5.8 million active ITINs, according to a report by the Treasury Department Inspect General.

Groups challenging information sharing

The government filed the document in a case brought by immigration rights groups the Centro de Trabajadores Unidos and Immigrant Solidarity DuPage. The groups are trying to block the IRS from sharing tax records with DHS for immigration enforcement, arguing that such sharing violates IRS disclosure laws.

The Trump administration moved Monday to dismiss the suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, arguing that “providing information to assist criminal investigations—is lawful.”

A hearing on a preliminary injunction to block such information sharing between IRS and DHS is set for April 16 before federal Judge Dabney L. Friedrich, whom President Donald Trump appointed in 2017.

Friedrich ruled against the groups last month, when they asked for a temporary restraining order following a story by The Washington Post that the agencies were considering sharing information in order to find immigrants to deport.

“A single news report about future cooperation between the IRS and DHS does not establish that the plaintiffs’ members are facing imminent injury,” according to the March 19 order. 

Prisoners look out of their cell as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center  or CECOT, on March 26, 2025, in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

This story was updated at 10:24 a.m. EDT, April 8

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court Monday said the Trump administration could continue for now to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to carry out rapid deportations of Venezuelans suspected of being gang members — but they must be given a chance to challenge their deportations in court.

The 5-4 decision, which lifted a temporary restraining order by a District of Columbia federal judge, will allow the Trump administration to deport Venezuelans 14 and older who are suspected of Tren de Aragua gang ties, in a victory for the administration of President Donald Trump.

But those immigrants who are subject to the wartime law must have “reasonable notice” in order to challenge their deportation in court “before such removal occurs,” according to the order. The question is which court.

The order argues that the venue of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia is wrong, and that the challenge, which was originally brought by five men in Texas, should be made in the Lone Star State. The challenge is no longer brought by five men and is now a class action.

“The detainees seek equitable relief against the implementation of the Proclamation and against their removal under the (Alien Enemies Act),” according to the Supreme Court. “They challenge the Government’s interpretation of the Act and assert that they do not fall within the category of removable alien enemies. But we do not reach those arguments.”

The president praised the decision, which did not address the merits of the actual law, on social media.

“The Supreme Court has upheld the Rule of Law in our Nation by allowing a President, whoever that may be, to be able to secure our Borders, and protect our families and our Country, itself,” Trump wrote. “A GREAT DAY FOR JUSTICE IN AMERICA!”

Dissenting justices

The three liberal justices dissented: Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The fourth dissent, in part, came from Amy Coney Barrett, who is considered a member of the court’s six-justice conservative majority.

“The Court’s legal conclusion is suspect,” Sotomayor wrote in her dissent.

She added that the majority opinion did not note the harm that could come to the Venezuelans who could face deportation under the Alien Enemies Act. Already, 238 men have been subject to the proclamation and are currently in a brutal mega-prison in El Salvador, the Terrorist Confinement Center  or CECOT.

“It does so without mention of the grave harm Plaintiffs will face if they are erroneously removed to El Salvador or regard for the Government’s attempts to subvert the judicial process throughout this litigation,” she said. “Because the Court should not reward the Government’s efforts to erode the rule of law with discretionary equitable relief, I respectfully dissent.”

A preliminary injunction hearing against the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act was set for Tuesday afternoon but U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg canceled the hearing in light of the decision of the high court.

That hearing was set to deal with the administration’s use of the law. Instead, Boasberg is setting a deadline of April 16 for the civil rights group that brought the suit to file a notice  “indicating whether they believe that they still have a basis to proceed on their Motion for Preliminary Injunction in this Court.”

This was the second decision from the high court Monday that sided with the Trump administration.

Earlier, Chief Justice John Roberts decided to temporarily pause a lower court’s order to require the Trump administration to return to the United States a Maryland man wrongly deported to a prison in El Salvador.

Appeal to the high court

The Trump administration March 28 appealed to the Supreme Court after an appeals court declined to do away with the temporary restraining order placed by Boasberg.

Boasberg had extended his temporary restraining order until April 12 to prevent any more deportations of Venezuelan nationals, invoked by Trump with a presidential proclamation on March 14.

The American Civil Liberties Union brought the suit against the Trump administration’s use of the wartime law. The legal organization asked the Supreme Court to keep the temporary restraining order in place because “it is becoming increasingly clear that many (perhaps most) of the men” who were on the March 15 deportation flights to the prison in El Salvador “were not actually members of” the Tren de Aragua and were “erroneously listed” due to their tattoos.

The same day that Boasberg issued his restraining order, on March 15, three deportation flights landed in El Salvador, where 261 men were taken to the mega-prison.

Boasberg has vowed to determine if the Trump administration violated his restraining order by asking for flight details but the Department of Justice has invoked the so-called “state secrets privilege” to block any information.

Prisoners sit at the Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, a mega-prison in Tecoluca, San Vicente, El Salvador, on April 4, 2025. The Trump administration has acknowledged mistakenly deporting a Maryland resident from El Salvador with protected status to the prison but is arguing against returning him to the U.S. (Photo by Alex Peña/Getty Images)

This story was updated at 4:34 p.m. Eastern.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily granted the Trump administration’s request Monday to block a lower court’s order to bring back to the United States a Maryland man who was erroneously deported to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador.

The order from Chief Justice John Roberts that stays a lower court order “pending further order of The Chief Justice or of the Court” came hours after another appeals court upheld an order to return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, of Beltsville, Maryland, to the United States.

Roberts’ order is not final, but pauses the lower court’s order to return Abrego Garcia while the justices reach a final decision on that order’s validity.

Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, told reporters Friday she hoped her husband would be returned to the U.S. by the midnight Monday deadline set by a federal judge.

The Trump administration made an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court on Monday, where U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that, despite the government’s admitted error in deporting Abrego Garcia, the lower court does not have the jurisdiction to order the Trump administration to return someone who the administration argues is no longer in U.S. custody.

The appeal to the high court came within minutes of an appeals court panel unanimously upholding the order by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, who set a deadline of midnight Monday for the administration to return Abrego Garcia to the U.S.

Despite being granted legal protection from deportation by a judge in 2019, immigration officials detained Abrego Garcia and sent him on a March 15 deportation flight to El Salvador, where he was incarcerated at the notorious prison known as Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT.

‘The government screwed up’

A panel of three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit agreed Abrego Garcia’s deportation to El Salvador was a major misstep.

“The United States Government has no legal authority to snatch a person who is lawfully present in the United States off the street and remove him from the country without due process,” two judges on the panel, Robert B. King and Stephanie D. Thacker, wrote.

King was appointed by former President Bill Clinton and Thacker was appointed by former President Barack Obama.

“The Government’s contention otherwise, and its argument that the federal courts are powerless to intervene, are unconscionable,” they wrote.

J. Harvie Wilkinson III, who was appointed by former President Ronald Reagan, wrote in his option that “[t]here is no question that the government screwed up here.”

He noted that President Donald Trump’s administration has not made an effort to rectify its mistake.

“The facts of this case thus present the potential for a disturbing loophole: namely that the government could whisk individuals to foreign prisons in violation of court orders and then contend, invoking its Article II powers, that it is no longer their custodian, and there is nothing that can be done. It takes no small amount of imagination to understand that this is a path of perfect lawlessness, one that courts cannot condone,” Wilkinson said.

Order to return

On Friday, Xinis ordered the Trump administration to return Abrego Garcia.

The Department of Justice quickly appealed the decision and Xinis issued a scathing 22-page order Sunday that cited records and official statements from Trump officials saying the administration has the power to return Abrego Garcia to the U.S.

“Neither the United States nor El Salvador have told anyone why he was returned to the very country to which he cannot return, or why he is detained at CECOT,” she wrote. “That silence is telling. As Defendants acknowledge, they had no legal authority to arrest him, no justification to detain him, and no grounds to send him to El Salvador—let alone deliver him into one of the most dangerous prisons in the Western Hemisphere.”

Abrego Garcia was on one of three deportation flights to CECOT on March 15. Two flights contained 238 Venezuelans who were deported under a wartime law that is currently being challenged in another court case.

Xinis slammed the Trump administration for arguing that she had no jurisdiction to order Abrego Garcia’s return.

“For the following reasons, their jurisdictional arguments fail as a matter of law,” she said. “Further, to avoid clear irreparable harm, and because equity and justice compels it, the Court grants the narrowest, daresay only, relief warranted: to order that Defendants return Abrego Garcia to the United States.”

She noted that the two countries have an agreement to house more than 250 deported men at CECOT.

The U.S. is paying El Salvador $6 million to detain the men at the prison. Trump is scheduled to meet with El Salvador President Nayib Bukele at the White House on April 14.

In response to the district court’s order to return Abrego Garcia, the president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, posted a GIF of a confused cartoon bunny on social media.

Attorney placed on leave

The Department of Justice attorney who argued on behalf of the Trump administration, Erez Reuveni, was placed on indefinite administrative leave over the weekend.

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said during a Fox News interview Sunday that Reuveni was placed on leave because he did not “vigorously” defend the administration.

Reuveni, a veteran government attorney, has argued for the DOJ over the course of four administrations.

During Friday’s hearing he was candid that the Trump administration had provided him little information on why Abrego Garcia could not be returned to the U.S. and that “the government made a choice here to produce no evidence.”

A man holds the Ukrainian and U.S. flags at a ceremony at the Holodomor Genocide Memorial in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 4, 2025, as the three-year anniversary of the Russian invasion neared. The memorial honors victims of a famine in Ukraine in 1932-33. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Unknown numbers of Ukrainians received emails by mistake from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security saying their humanitarian protected status was being revoked and they would have to leave the United States within days, the agency said Friday.

“A message was sent in error to some Ukrainians under the U4U program. The U4U parole program has not been terminated,” a DHS spokesperson told States Newsroom, referring to the Uniting for Ukraine program.

Attorneys challenging the Trump administration’s pause of humanitarian applications for Ukrainians and Afghans, as well as the end of legal status programs for nationals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, filed a copy of the termination notice sent to Ukrainians in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts on Friday.

The notice, given on Thursday, instructs any Ukrainians in the Uniting for Ukraine humanitarian parole program to leave the U.S. within seven days of receiving the notice, according to court filings. 

“It is time for you to leave the United States,” according to the notice sent to some Ukrainians that immigration rights groups filed in court. “If you do not depart the United States immediately you will be subject to potential law enforcement actions that will result in your removal from the United States — unless you have otherwise obtained a lawful basis to remain here.”

The next hearing is set for Monday before U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama.

‘Numerous reports’ of erroneous emails

“Plaintiffs’ counsel have received numerous reports throughout the day today that other Ukrainian members of the putative class—potentially thousands—have received an identical letter, including individuals with approximately two years left on their parole period,” according to the brief by Justice Action Center, an immigrant rights group.

According to the brief filed Friday, attorneys with the Justice Action Center notified the Department of Justice attorneys handling the case. The lawyers said the response from those DOJ attorneys was “to say that they ‘have been looking into this’ but ‘don’t have any information to share yet.’”

The Biden administration’s renewed work and deportation protections for 103,700 Ukrainians are set to expire on Oct. 19, 2026.

Trump and Zelenskyy

In late February, President Donald Trump got into a heated exchange with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a meeting at the White House, breaking with Ukraine and its resistance to Russia’s invasion more than three years ago.

Former President Joe Biden’s administration created temporary protections for Ukrainians because of Russia’s invasion of the country.

Trump’s history with Ukraine, which was at the center of his first impeachment when he halted security aid approved by Congress, and his friendly relationship with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, have moved the U.S. further away from European allies who have coalesced around Ukraine’s fight for its democracy.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt in early March denied that the Trump administration was revoking protections for Ukrainians.

“The truth: no decision has been made at this time,” Leavitt wrote on social media.