An extraordinary exchange unfolded in a Maryland courtroom as a federal judge sharply criticized President Donald Trump’s officials over their handling of Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s deportation case.

According to POLITICO, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis on Friday accused the Trump administration of stalling and acting in “bad faith” in response to court orders to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia, who was erroneously deported to El Salvador by U.S. immigration authorities.

Xinis, appointed by President Barack Obama, described the administration’s depositions as devoid of useful information and said top officials repeatedly claimed ignorance about steps taken to secure Abrego Garcia’s release from a maximum-security Salvadoran prison. The judge’s frustration boiled over as she noted that, despite repeated court directives, the government failed to provide witnesses with direct knowledge about the case.

Judge Xinis questions administration’s intentions

The hearing on Friday revolved around the Trump administration’s attempts to keep certain records confidential, with government lawyers asserting that some information was protected as “state secrets.” Judge Xinis did not immediately resolve those claims, but her remarks made clear she was unconvinced by the government’s explanations. She pointed to a troubling pattern: public comments by President Trump and his senior aides that appeared to openly contradict what the government was claiming in court.

In particular, Xinis referenced recent statements from the Department of Homeland Security and President Trump himself, suggesting the administration had no intention of facilitating Abrego Garcia’s return—even though the Supreme Court had already ruled that his deportation was illegal and that the government was obliged to act.

The Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and the State have all acknowledged that Abrego Garcia should not have been deported in March. His removal was in direct defiance of a 2019 federal court order that found he faced credible threats of violence from gangs in El Salvador.

Public defiance and court frustration

The judge’s patience appeared to wear thin as she cited a series of conflicting positions taken by administration officials. At one point, she expressed disbelief at the government’s claim that it was complying in good faith, especially in light of high-profile statements to the contrary.

Judge Xinis highlighted a recent ABC interview in which President Trump said he could bring Abrego Garcia back with a simple phone call but would not intervene. She also referenced a social media post from the Department of Homeland Security stating that Abrego Garcia “will never be allowed to return to the United States,” followed by another declaring that he “will not return to our country under the Trump Administration.”

The judge addressed government attorneys directly, saying these statements amounted to an admission that the administration was refusing to take meaningful action. The Justice Department’s Jonathan Guynn, however, attempted to recast the statements, arguing that they did not conflict with the administration’s legal obligations.

Government explanations under scrutiny

When pressed on what, if any, steps had been taken to comply with the court’s order, Guynn asserted that even if Abrego Garcia returned to the U.S., he would not be released but would instead be placed into deportation proceedings. Judge Xinis countered that the law still required the government to provide due process, which would allow Abrego Garcia to contest his removal.

Meanwhile, Abrego Garcia’s attorney, Andrew Rossman, forcefully disputed the Justice Department’s assertions. He told the court that the government had failed to provide any real transparency or evidence of efforts to secure his client’s return.

Andrew Rossman, attorney for Abrego Garcia, said:

My head is spinning with what I just heard from the government. They’ve told us nothing — zero — nothing at all about what steps they’ve taken to return my client to the United States. … I suspect there are no steps because nothing’s been happening in reality, or they’re performative steps.

Agencies face accusations of foot-dragging

Judge Paula Xinis stressed several times that the court had directed the government to present witnesses with direct knowledge of the steps taken to address Abrego Garcia’s deportation. However, she noted that the officials who testified provided unclear and evasive responses.

In court, Judge Xinis said the testimony was filled with vague answers like "I don't know." She concluded that the government had failed to follow the court’s order, though not out of intentional wrongdoing.

Political signals and legal battles over deportation

The Abrego Garcia case has become a flashpoint in the Trump administration’s broader campaign to deliver on its mass deportation promises. Public comments by President Trump and his top officials have, in the judge’s view, undermined the government’s legal position and raised questions about adherence to constitutional due process.

The Supreme Court’s previous ruling declared Abrego Garcia’s deportation illegal and affirmed the lower court’s directive for the government to act. Yet, the administration’s resistance has persisted, with different agencies at times contradicting each other in public statements. Judge Xinis criticized this as a “dual narrative,” warning that such conduct erodes confidence in the legal process.

While the administration’s lawyers insisted they were acting in accordance with the law, Xinis and Abrego Garcia’s legal team argued that the government had effectively done nothing to comply with orders.

Next steps and legal uncertainty for Abrego Garcia

The hearing ended without an immediate ruling on the Trump administration’s claims of confidentiality and state secrets. Judge Xinis indicated that she would weigh those arguments but signaled her frustration with what she described as a lack of candor and transparency from government officials.

Abrego Garcia’s case remains in limbo, with the government’s next steps unclear and the judge’s patience running thin. The legal stakes are high, as the outcome will determine not only the fate of one man but also the government’s willingness to comply with court orders in politically sensitive immigration cases.

Judge’s sharp warnings amid administration resistance

Judge Paula Xinis presided over an unusually tense court session in Greenbelt, Maryland, on Friday, where she openly rebuked President Donald Trump’s administration for failing to comply with orders regarding Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador. The judge’s comments centered on the administration’s lack of transparency and conflicting public statements about whether it would take action to bring Abrego Garcia back.