A federal judge issued a ruling on Wednesday concerning the unsealing of several court documents in the case regarding Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s deportation. The Trump administration’s claims that such actions might compromise national security were dismissed by the ruling.
The decision was made by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland, following arguments from media organizations asserting that the First Amendment grants the public rights to court record access. The documents made accessible thus far do not seem to contain significant new or unknown details. Judge Xinis noted that one document was “relatively boilerplate,” pertaining to the Trump administration’s request to temporarily halt discovery—a preliminary lawsuit phase where evidence is exchanged by parties.
“It does not disclose any potentially privileged or otherwise sensitive information for which a compelling government interest outweighs the right to access,” Xinis stated.
The judge also noted that certain documents were made public before sealing was requested the following day. Included in these documents was correspondence between Abrego Garcia’s attorneys and the U.S. government regarding efforts to return him from El Salvador. The Trump’s administration’s lawyers frequently objected to answering questions, claiming they involved state secrets, sensitive diplomatic talks, and other classified information.
One example is the U.S. attorneys referencing “appropriate diplomatic discussions with El Salvador” and stating that revealing details “could negatively impact any outcome.” Additionally, a transcript from a court hearing dated April 30 will be partially released, with sections redacted to protect potentially classified data.
This recent ruling is independent of the Trump administration’s pending invocation of the state secrets privilege, a legal doctrine typically employed in military cases. The administration contends that disclosing information on the Abrego Garcia case in open court, or sharing even with the judge in private, poses national security risks.
Xinis has yet to determine a ruling on the state secrets assertion. Meanwhile, Abrego Garcia’s legal representatives have accused the Trump administration of failing to take action to facilitate his return to the U.S. They claim that the government uses the privilege to obscure the error of deporting him and the subsequent refusal to correct the situation.
Abrego Garcia’s deportation conflicted with a 2019 U.S. immigration judge’s decision protecting him from expulsion to El Salvador. The immigration judge concluded that Abrego Garcia was at risk of persecution by a notorious local gang.
Abrego Garcia’s American wife initiated legal action over his deportation, and Judge Xinis ordered his return on April 4. The Supreme Court ruled on April 10 that the administration must work on his return.
In late April, President Donald Trump stated in an interview that he could facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return through a phone call to El Salvador’s president. However, Trump said he refrained from doing so, claiming Abrego Garcia’s alleged, though unproven, affiliation with the MS-13 gang. Abrego Garcia has denied any such ties.