Archive · 18 Aug 2026
DOJ asks appeals court to restore smuggling charges against Abrego Garcia
A man named Kilmar Abrego Garcia was sent by mistake from the United States to El Salvador.
He went to court to prove that the government had done something wrong.
Later, the government accused him of a crime called human smuggling.
A judge said the accusation was unfair punishment for winning his case and dismissed it.
The Justice Department, the part of the government that handles legal cases, disagrees.
It asked a higher court to bring the charges back.
The man's lawyers say the charges were ordered by the White House to get back at him.
The accusation started after a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee.
Now a higher court will decide if the charges should be allowed to continue.
The US Department of Justice asked the 6th Circuit to reinstate human smuggling charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
A Tennessee federal judge dismissed the charges in May, calling the prosecution 'vindictive and selective.'
The DOJ argues career prosecutors had legitimate bases and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Garcia's defense team calls the DOJ filing 'flat wrong,' citing White House instructions behind the case.
The case began with a 2022 Tennessee speeding stop in which Garcia was released with a warning.
- Who
- Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the US Department of Justice, his defense team, and Tennessee Judge Waverly Crenshaw
- What
- The DOJ asked a federal appeals court to reinstate human smuggling charges against Abrego Garcia after a lower court dismissed them as vindictive
- When
- The DOJ filing came Monday; the charges were dismissed in May; the case stems from a 2022 speeding stop
- Where
- The appeal was filed with the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit; the original case arose in Tennessee
- Why
- The DOJ says career prosecutors had legitimate evidence, while Garcia's team says the charges were retaliation for his successful wrongful-deportation lawsuit
DOJ (Prosecution)
Garcia's Defense and District Court
Vindictive prosecution
DOJ (Prosecution)
The charges were based on the evidence, the law, and proof beyond a reasonable doubt, not retaliation.
Garcia's Defense and District Court
The prosecution was 'vindictive and selective' and would not have been brought without Garcia's successful lawsuit challenging his removal.
Court's dismissal power
DOJ (Prosecution)
The May order dramatically expands courts' power to dismiss serious charges based on subjective assessments of prosecutors' motivations.
Garcia's Defense and District Court
The evidence, including statements from the Trump administration, clearly showed an improper motive.
Role of Todd Blanche
DOJ (Prosecution)
The DOJ disputes that the prosecution was vindictive and declined to call decision makers, including Todd Blanche, to testify under oath.
Garcia's Defense and District Court
Blanche's statement appeared to indicate the charges were brought because Garcia prevailed in his wrongful-deportation case, and refusing to call him undermines the DOJ's position.
- Defendant
- Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man
- Charges
- Human smuggling and conspiracy to commit human smuggling
- Appeals court
- US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit
- Lower court ruling
- Charges dismissed in May as 'vindictive and selective' by Tennessee Judge Waverly Crenshaw
- DOJ position
- Career prosecutors had 'multiple legitimate bases' and evidence beyond a reasonable doubt
- Defense position
- Prosecution was vindictive and initiated on instructions from the White House
- Case origin
- 2022 speeding stop in Tennessee; Garcia left with a warning after carrying nine passengers
- Allegation
- Received payment for transporting people residing illegally in the US