- The Justice Department appealed to the Sixth Circuit on August 17, 2026, to reinstate charges against Abrego Garcia.
- A judge previously dismissed the smuggling indictment, ruling the prosecution was a retaliatory response to Garcia’s legal victory.
- Prosecutors maintain the case stems from evidence found during a November 2022 Tennessee traffic stop involving ten passengers.
The Justice Department asked the Sixth Circuit on August 17, 2026, to revive criminal charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia, arguing that a federal judge wrongly dismissed the indictment after his return from a mistaken deportation.
The government’s opening brief seeks to overturn U.S. District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr.’s May ruling in Nashville, Tennessee. It asks the appellate court to reinstate charges tied to alleged smuggling offenses under 8 U.S.C. § 1324.
The case turns on why prosecutors pursued the indictment. The government says career prosecutors relied on evidence and law. Abrego Garcia’s defense says officials brought the case in retaliation after he successfully challenged his removal to El Salvador.
The appellate court has not ruled. As of August 2026, the filing remains available through the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Tennessee.
The agency says Crenshaw “gravely erred” by dismissing the indictment on vindictive-prosecution grounds. Its brief says the decision to seek charges came from career prosecutors who believed the evidence could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
“The decision to seek an indictment against Abrego Garcia for human smuggling was made by career prosecutors based on the evidence, the law, and their firm belief that there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Abrego Garcia had committed the offenses charged.”
The defense offered the opposite account on August 18. Its lawyers said the prosecution followed presidential pressure and Abrego Garcia’s success before the Supreme Court.
“This case was initiated vindictively and on instructions from the White House after our client successfully won his Supreme Court case. The proof was clear notwithstanding the DOJ’s refusal to call the actual decision makers, including [Deputy Attorney General] Todd Blanche, to testify under oath.”
The indictment followed a 2022 traffic stop
The charges arose from a November 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee, not from conduct after Abrego Garcia returned to the United States.
He was driving a van carrying nine other people. Officers issued him a speeding warning, and prosecutors did not arrest him during that encounter.
After his return on June 6, 2025, prosecutors charged him with one count of conspiracy to transport aliens and one count of unlawful transportation of undocumented aliens. The indictment invokes 8 U.S.C. § 1324.
The timing drove the dispute. Abrego Garcia moved in August 2025 to dismiss the indictment, alleging vindictive and selective prosecution. Crenshaw later dismissed the case in May 2026.
Crenshaw’s ruling focused on the sequence of events. The judge wrote:
“The objective evidence here shows that, absent Abrego’s successful lawsuit challenging his removal to El Salvador, the Government would not have brought this prosecution. The Executive Branch closed its investigation on the November 2022 traffic stop. Only after Abrego succeeded in vindicating his rights did the Executive Branch reopen that investigation.”
The government’s appeal challenges that conclusion and asks the appellate court to restore the indictment. The court’s jurisdiction includes federal cases from Tennessee.
A deportation error preceded the prosecution
Abrego Garcia, a 31-year-old Salvadoran national, had lived in the United States since 2011. He lived in Maryland with his U.S. citizen wife and children.
In 2019, immigration authorities granted him withholding of removal after he presented evidence of credible threats from the MS-13 gang. That protection did not prevent his removal to El Salvador on March 15, 2025.
The Trump administration later described the deportation as an “administrative error” and a “clerical error.” Abrego Garcia spent nearly three months at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, known as CECOT, without trial.
On April 10, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the government to “facilitate” his return. He came back to the United States on June 6, 2025, and prosecutors charged him immediately.
Attorney General Pam Bondi defended the prosecution that day.
“Abrego Garcia has landed in the United States to face justice. This is what American justice looks like.”
The civil and criminal proceedings developed separately. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis handled the initial civil case in Maryland and released Abrego Garcia on bail.
Officials dispute who drove the charging decision
The record described in the case includes competing accounts of the decision-making process.
Rob McGuire, a former acting U.S. attorney, argued that he was the sole decision-maker for the indictment. Court records also cited regular communications involving Aakash Singh, an associate deputy attorney general.
Todd Blanche was the deputy attorney general whom the defense wanted to question under oath. The court also linked Blanche to a suggestion that prosecuting Abrego Garcia had become a priority after the deportation error.
The government’s appellate position rejects the idea that the prosecution reflected retaliation. Its brief characterizes the lower court’s ruling as a “dramatic expansion” of judicial power and maintains that prosecutors acted on the existing evidence.
The dispute therefore reaches beyond the 2022 traffic stop. It asks whether the surrounding sequence, including Abrego Garcia’s successful removal litigation and the government’s renewed investigation, supports dismissal of the indictment.
The defense has described the appeal as continued “political harassment.” It also disputes government allegations that Abrego Garcia has ties to MS-13. Prosecutors have not presented evidence of those alleged ties in open court.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said foreign policy is conducted by the President, not the courts. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt acknowledged that the initial deportation was a “clerical error.”
The immigration case remains separate
The appellate dispute does not resolve Abrego Garcia’s immigration status. His immigration case remains separate from the criminal prosecution.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement has also sought to remove him to Liberia, while a federal judge temporarily blocked that effort. The government also pursued removal to a third country such as Uganda, which another federal judge temporarily blocked.
Abrego Garcia remains in the United States under court-ordered protection while the appellate process continues. A ruling reinstating the indictment would return the criminal case to the district court, but the appellate decision itself would not determine his guilt.
The original removal, the Supreme Court’s April 10, 2025, order, the June 6, 2025, return, and the May 2026 dismissal now form the chronology before the appellate court. The next decision belongs to the judges reviewing whether Crenshaw applied the proper standard when he dismissed the charges.
This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific case.
