Trump's First Big Vindictive Prosecution Just Went Up in Smoke

The Trump administration targeted Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father, after the Justice Department mistakenly sent him to El Salvador’s CECOT megaprison. The Supreme Court ordered his return to the United States, and the administration complied after initial reluctance. Afterward, the government sought to deport him again and pursued a dubious criminal indictment to deter defiance of the president. A U.S. District Judge dismissed the indictment, stating the investigation was tainted by a vindictive motive. The judge emphasized that proving selective prosecution is difficult, then detailed the timeline leading to the indictment, including a 2022 traffic stop, to show the government’s improper purpose.

"The Trump administration has spent the past year doggedly targeting a Maryland father named Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who gained fame after the Justice Department admitted to mistakenly sending him to El Salvador's CECOT megaprison last spring. The Supreme Court demanded the administration return Abrego Garcia to the United States, and Donald Trump complied after initial reluctance that verged on a constitutional crisis. Ever since, Trump's government has sought to make an example of Abrego Garcia to demonstrate, both by seeking to deport him again and by cooking up a highly dubious indictment, that defying this president will result only in further recriminations."

"Abrego Garcia's story, which has become emblematic of the unleashed retribution of the president's second term, finally took a happy turn last week, after the judge in that prosecution acknowledged what was obvious for all to see: Abrego Garcia had been targeted not based on any crime, but for having stood up to the president and having sought to push back against Trump's horrifying deportation program. After analyzing the DOJ's bad-faith efforts over the course of the past 12 months, U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw called out the government's motive in no uncertain terms."

"The judge’s ruling centered on the idea that the case was not driven by criminal conduct but by retaliation for resisting the president’s deportation program. The dismissal followed a review of the government’s conduct over the prior year and a determination that the prosecution was improperly motivated. The court treated the indictment as part of a broader effort to punish defiance and deter similar resistance."

Read at Slate Magazine