A Maryland-based federal judge blasted the Trump administration for dodging discovery obligations in the case of a mistakenly deported man as she pushes ahead with a review of whether to hold officials in contempt.
U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis last week ordered four Trump administration officials to sit for depositions, also requiring them to share documents and respond to written questions from attorneys for Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
But attorneys for the mistakenly deported man said earlier this week that the Trump administration was flouting that directive, saying they were “producing nothing of substance” and refusing to answer questions by asserting it has no power to secure Abrego Garcia’s return despite a Supreme Court order to “facilitate” his return.
A late Tuesday order, Xinis said the lack of fulsome responses “reflects a deliberate evasion of their fundamental discovery obligations.”
“Defendants have failed to respond in good faith, and their refusal to do so can only be viewed as willful and intentional noncompliance,” she wrote.
At another point she cited a “willful and bad faith refusal to comply with discovery obligations,” ordering that they respond “fully” to any written questions.
As attorneys for Abrego Garcia and the Justice Department tangled over the posed questions, the Trump administration objected to some discovery requests based on the “false premise that the United States can or has been ordered to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador.”
Xinis faulted the Trump administration for “continued mischaracterization of the Supreme Court’s Order.”
“That Order made clear that this Court ‘properly required the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador,’” she wrote.
Xinis also reprimanded the Justice Department for withholding some information it said was privileged without formally asserting the protection.
“Defendants have known, at least since last week, that this Court requires specific legal and factual showings to support any claim of privilege. Yet they have continued to rely on boilerplate assertions. That ends now,” she wrote.
Xinis gave the Trump administration until 6 p.m. Wednesday to fully respond to questions.