By Jan Wolfe
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Kilmar Abrego, the migrant whose wrongful deportation to his native El Salvador made him a symbol of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, must remain in the United States through at least October, a judge said during a court hearing on Wednesday.
The hearing before U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland signaled that Abrego’s legal battle is far from over, with his attorneys vowing to pursue multiple avenues to block the Trump administration’s latest plan to deport him to Uganda.
During the hearing, Xinis extended an earlier order from Monday that temporarily prohibited Abrego’s removal from the continental United States while she considers a petition he filed seeking to block his deportation.
Xinis also said Abrego, currently being held at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Virginia, should remain within 200 miles of her courthouse in Greenbelt, Maryland.
The judge said she intends to rule within 30 days of the Oct. 6 hearing.
The Trump administration’s push to deport Abrego, 30, to an African country where he has no ties is the latest twist in a saga that began in March, when U.S. authorities accused him of being a gang member and sent him to an El Salvadoran prison despite an order from a U.S. immigration judge prohibiting his deportation to that country .
Abrego was brought back in June to face criminal charges of transporting migrants living in the United States illegally.
He has pleaded not guilty and his lawyers have accused the administration of vindictive prosecution. He also has denied the administration’s claims that he is a gang member.
Abrego, a sheet metal worker who entered the United States illegally, had been living in Maryland with his wife, their child and two of her children – all of whom are American citizens – when he was arrested and sent to El Salvador.
Abrego’s lawyer said during Wednesday’s hearing that he will seek asylum in the United States through a separate proceeding before an immigration judge.
His lawyers have said that the administration’s handling of the case is indicative of the Republican president’s push to expand executive power in immigration matters at the expense of due process mandated by the U.S. Constitution.
(Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Mark Porter)
