Trump DOJ rejects court deadline to return MS-13 member from El Salvadoran prison

The Department of Justice on Friday said a court-ordered deadline for how it plans to return an alleged MS-13 gang member back to the US after the Trump administration deported him was "impracticable." This comes after the Supreme Court ruled that the administration needed to "facilitate" the return of the man.

The Friday court filing from the Department of Justice stated that "Defendants are unable to provide the information requested by the Court on the impracticable deadline set by the Court hours after the Supreme Court issued its order."

They noted that the Supreme Court’s order from the day prior ordered the US District Court for the District of Maryland to "clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs," and said that the lower court had not yet clarified what it means to "facilitate" or "effectuate" the return of the man "as it relates to this case, as Plaintiff is in the custody of a foreign sovereign."

Kilmar Abrego Garcia was deported in March to an El Salvador prison, with the Trump claiming that he was a member of the violent MS-13 gang. In a filing to the Supreme Court, the DOJ said that he was removed to El Salvador through "administrative error," though his removal from the US "was not an error."

Hours after the Supreme Court’s Thursday ruling, Judge Paula Xinis ordered the Trump administration to "take all available steps" to "facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia to the United States as soon as possible," and demanded details on Abrego Garcia’s current location, status, and steps being taken to facilitate his return, per Politico.

The court filing from the Department of Justice concluded, "Defendants received the order late in the evening last night. They are reviewing the order and actively evaluating next steps. It is unreasonable and impracticable for Defendants to reveal potential steps before those steps are reviewed, agreed upon, and vetted. Foreign affairs cannot operate on judicial timelines, in part because it involves sensitive country-specific considerations wholly inappropriate for judicial review."