Prosecutor claims that delayed charges against Abrego Garcia were ‘extraordinary’ but justified

U.S. Attorney’s Office Defends Controversial Smuggling Case Against Salvadoran Man

A representative from the U.S. Attorney’s office testified Thursday that the human smuggling prosecution against Kilmar Abrego Garcia was based on evidence, despite the unusual two-year gap between the alleged offense and charges being filed.

During a federal court hearing in Nashville, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Rob McGuire acknowledged that the timing of the charges was “extraordinary” while defending the prosecution’s legitimacy. The case has drawn intense scrutiny due to Abrego Garcia’s complex immigration history and mistaken deportation that reached the U.S. Supreme Court.

Abrego Garcia, a 30-year-old Salvadoran citizen who entered the United States illegally as a teenager, has lived in Maryland for years under Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervision. He has an American wife and child and received protection from deportation in 2019 when an immigration judge determined he faced danger from gang threats in El Salvador.

Despite this court order, Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador in 2025. Following a U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled the Trump administration had acted improperly, officials were forced to return him to the United States. Upon his return, however, he was charged with human smuggling based on a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee.

The circumstances surrounding this prosecution have become a flashpoint in the immigration debate. Abrego Garcia’s attorneys argue the case represents vindictive prosecution designed to punish him after the administration lost the deportation case. They are seeking dismissal of the charges.

Body camera footage from the 2022 incident shows Abrego Garcia being pulled over for speeding by Tennessee Highway Patrol. Although officers noted there were nine passengers in the car and discussed potential smuggling concerns among themselves, they ultimately allowed Abrego Garcia to continue with only a warning.

McGuire testified that he decided to prosecute after viewing this footage, stating, “I was immediately struck by how similar what was being depicted in the body cam was to those investigations.” He cited several factors that raised suspicion: nine people in a vehicle without luggage, the car belonging to someone with “a human smuggling background,” and the route being traveled.

Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent in Charge Rana Saoud testified that she first became aware of the traffic stop in April 2025 through an article in the conservative Tennessee Star publication. Saoud initiated the investigation, claiming she was under no pressure from superiors and that “the case just kept getting stronger.”

Under cross-examination, both McGuire and Saoud acknowledged the case’s high-profile nature stemmed from the defendant’s identity rather than the allegations themselves. “Mr. Abrego was in the news all the time at that point,” Saoud conceded.

Defense attorney David Patton revealed that a different HSI office in Baltimore had known about the traffic stop years earlier but never pressed charges, even closing the investigation after Abrego Garcia’s deportation. The case was only reopened following the Supreme Court’s decision requiring his return to the U.S.

Adding complexity to the case, Jose Hernandez Reyes, the owner of the car Abrego Garcia was driving during the traffic stop, later told federal agents while incarcerated that he ran a smuggling operation with Abrego Garcia as his driver.

U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw previously found evidence suggesting the prosecution “may be vindictive,” citing concerning statements from Trump administration officials. Particularly troubling was a statement from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche that appeared to link the criminal charges to Abrego Garcia winning his wrongful deportation case.

The defense has battled prosecutors over whether high-ranking Department of Justice officials should testify and what emails should be disclosed. While McGuire insisted he alone made the prosecution decision, Judge Crenshaw’s review of sealed documents indicated otherwise, writing that some documents “suggest not only that McGuire was not a solitary decision-maker, but he in fact reported to others in DOJ and the decision to prosecute Abrego may have been a joint decision.”

Abrego Garcia, who has pleaded not guilty, attended Thursday’s hearing with his wife as the legal proceedings continue to attract national attention amid heightened tensions over immigration enforcement policies.