NewNow you can hear Fox News article!
Greenbelt, MD. , A federal judge will hear from a top homeland security officer on Thursday as he weighs the next steps in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoron Pravasi wrongly deported from the US and now the central for the legal battle on Trump’s presidential powers.
US District Judge Paula Shinis on Monday ordered the Trump administration to produce a government witness “with personal knowledge” about the administration’s plans for Abrego Garcia, who said that he would be expected to testify under the oath, “Hu, What, Kahan and when” the government’s plans were planned to re -release the government’s plans.
A few hours before the hearing, officials of the Department of Justice informed Judge Shinis that they are planning to call as a witness Thomas Gills, who are the Assistant Director to remove the operation office in immigration and customs enforcement (ICE) enforcement and Los Angeles, California.
The Trump administration officials are expected to address on Thursday, “Among other subjects, valid locations for demolition for custody, the nature and time of any notice provided to Abrego Garcia, the location of any proposed custody or transfer, and the proclative steps intend to pursue the defendants,” Shinis said in his order.
Federal Judge Trump’s birthright citizenship prevents the ban for all infants, tests the powers of the lower court
Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoron illegal migrant, who was sent to Al Salvador, is seen wearing a Chicago Bulls Hat in this handout (Handout via Abrego Garcia Family/Reuters)
The Department of Justice said in a hearing earlier this week that Abrego Garcia could be removed from the US from today on July 16 – nine days later, when a federal judge in Tennessee would consider whether he should be freed and shifted to DHS custody.
Abrego Garcia was currently returned from Al Salvador in June – three months after his exile and the Supreme Court supported Shinis’s order to facilitate his return.
On arrival, Abrego was immediately slapped with federal allegations arising from 2022 traffic stops. The officials of the Department of Justice admitted in court this week that they immediately plan to take him into custody of snow earlier this month and sent him to the third country regardless of the status of his criminal case.
Shinis, who is handling his civil matter, grilled the Trump administration lawyers on Monday when they opened a federal inquiry at Abrego Garcia in the American Central District of Tennessee – and how the investigation and federal prosecution testified to the government with the government’s testimony.
Scots denied Florida AG request to implement controversial immigration law
Earlier this year earlier this year, a divided picture of prisoners in Sikot, a maximum security of the protesters next to a photo of protesters against Trump’s decision to send hundreds of migrants to the facility to hundreds of migrants in convenience. (Getty image)
She used to grow in a duality of criminal investigation into a deadline, given that, by the government’s own entry, it started an investigation into Abrego Garcia in the Central District on April 28, 2025 – at the same time the officer was telling the court that the administration was to order a foreign government to order a foreign government to order a foreign government.
“Now I have real concerns – as I am not for the last three months,” Shinis said in response.
The lawyers of the Department of Justice also told Xinis that they do not plan to keep her in the US until her testing is over.
“No,” Attorney Jonathan Guine of the Department of Justice simply responded.
It still shows Paula Shinis from the US Senate Judiciary Committee from the video from July 22, 2015. (US Senate Judiciary Committee)
Click here to get Fox News app
“No intention that we put him in Limbo in snow custody, while we wait for the criminal case to reveal,” Guinis told Xinis. “He will be removed, as there will be another illegal foreigner in that process.”
“Looking at the series of illegal tasks here, I feel that it is well within my right to order this hearing – perhaps more than one – to hear at least one witness with Firsthand Knowledge, who can answer these questions immediately about the next steps”
