Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
A federal judge raised serious questions Wednesday about the Trump administration’s claim that it is not responsible for the men it deported to El Salvador, citing President Donald Trump’s own public statements suggesting otherwise.
Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg sharply questioned the government’s assertion that the 238 deported men — alleged by the administration to be members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua — are not in the United States’ “constructive custody,” despite being held in El Salvador’s notorious CECOT prison.
At the heart of the legal dispute is whether the men remain under U.S. authority, even while detained abroad. The government has argued that because the men are physically held in El Salvador, it has relinquished control. But Trump, along with White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, have repeatedly made comments that suggest otherwise.
Judge Boasberg directly challenged Deputy Assistant Attorney General Abhishek Kambli over Trump’s claim that he could have one of the detainees, Abrego Garcia, returned to the U.S. “with a phone call.”
“Is the president not telling the truth, or could he secure the release of Mr. Abrego Garcia?” Boasberg pressed.
Kambli responded that such remarks reflected Trump’s “belief about influence” but said, “influence does not equate to constructive custody.”
However, Boasberg noted the administration’s own admissions — including U.S. financial support for CECOT — as potential evidence that Washington remains functionally in control of the detainees’ fate. “The plaintiffs have a lot of facts in your favor,” Boasberg told lawyers challenging the deportations.
In addition to public remarks, Kambli acknowledged the existence of a March 22 grant to El Salvador for law enforcement purposes “related to the 238 men,” and admitted that the funds “can be used for detention of these individuals.”
Boasberg has ordered the Trump administration to submit sworn declarations clarifying who has actual authority over the men held at CECOT. He also gave attorneys with the ACLU and Democracy Forward, who brought the lawsuit, until Monday to decide whether to seek discovery, including depositions or documents that could further clarify the detainees’ legal status.
The Supreme Court recently lifted a prior order from Boasberg temporarily blocking the deportations but did not rule on the merits of Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act — a rarely used wartime law that has previously only been employed during conflicts like the War of 1812 and World War II.
Boasberg noted that distinction on Wednesday. “The Supreme Court did not analyze that precise issue,” he told Kambli, who conceded the point.
The legal battle over the deportations and the limits of executive power under the Alien Enemies Act is shaping up to be a major test of due process rights and presidential authority. Boasberg’s next decisions could determine whether the case opens up to broader scrutiny — or is curtailed before more information becomes public.
