by Anita Wadhwani, Tennessee Lookout
August 20, 2025

NASHVILLE — Lawyers for Kilmar Abrego Garcia are asking a federal judge in Tennessee to dismiss human smuggling charges against him, calling the case a clear example of “selective and vindictive prosecution” by the Trump administration.

In a motion filed late Tuesday, just days ahead of Abrego’s expected pretrial release, the attorneys conceded their argument to dismiss the case is “infrequently made and rarely succeeds.”

“But if there has ever been a case for dismissal on those grounds, this is that case,” they wrote. “The government is attempting to use this case — and this Court — to punish Mr. Abrego for successfully fighting his unlawful removal. That is a constitutional violation of the most basic sort.”

The government has not yet filed a legal response. “The United States’ position is set forth in Mr. McGuire’s statements in court and our pleadings,” a spokesperson for Acting U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire said in an email Wednesday.

The 35-page petition seeking to dismiss all charges narrates a chain of events that began with Abrego’s detention by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in March, while driving with his son in Maryland, through his deportation days later to a Salvadoran prison. Abrego remained for months in the notorious maximum security CECOT prison, despite the admission by a government attorney he had been sent there in error. 

Abrego subsequently said he was tortured while in CECOT. 

‘A wide-ranging and unprecedented retribution campaign’

Attorneys for Abrego challenged his removal to El Salvador for lack of due process in a separate lawsuit filed in federal court in Maryland, where the 29-year-old sheet metal apprentice had been living with his wife and children.

“The government did not take steps to fix its mistake,” his Tennessee lawyers wrote Tuesday. “Instead, in response to his lawsuit — and to the substantial publicity it received — the government undertook a wide-ranging and unprecedented retribution campaign against Mr. Abrego.” 

The human smuggling charges brought against Abrego in Tennessee are part of that campaign, his lawyers argued. 

Kilmar Abrego Garcia to remain jailed in Tennessee as judge weighs arguments on release

A Tennessee grand jury in June returned the indictments for “conspiracy to unlawfully transport illegal aliens for financial gain” and “unlawful transportation of illegal aliens for financial gain.” Prosecutors contend Abrego participated in a national scheme to move immigrants who entered the United States illegally to points around the country. Abrego, as his attorneys refer to him in legal filings, has pleaded not guilty.

The charges are tied to a 2022 traffic stop in Putnam County, Tenn., where Abrego was pulled over for speeding with nine passengers in the back of his vehicle. Abrego was neither ticketed nor arrested in the stop.

A Department of Homeland Security special agent later testified he was not tasked with investigating the Tennessee traffic stop until April 28 of this year. By then, a Maryland federal judge had ordered the government to facilitate Abrego’s return to the U.S. and the Supreme Court had upheld the decision. 

The government returned Abrego to Tennessee to face charges on June 6. 

Case draws national scrutiny

The case generated widespread public scrutiny of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown tactics during his initial months in office, which were criticized for undermining due process rights guaranteed to both citizens and noncitizens. 

Abrego, a Salvadoran national who entered the United States illegally as a teenager, is subject to a 2019 immigration court order that prohibits the government from deporting him to El Salvador, where he says he faces threats of gang violence.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, wrongly deported to El Salvador prison, to face federal charges in Nashville

After his wrongful deportation, administration officials, including President Donald Trump, singled out Abrego in their public comments, calling him a “gangbanger,” “monster,” “illegal predator,” “illegal alien terrorist,” “wife beater,” and “human trafficker.” 

Abrego’s attorneys accused the administration of a public smear campaign intended to paper over its embarrassment over his wrongful deportation and retaliate against his legal efforts to assert his due process rights. Abrego has denied gang affiliation. 

The administration’s public statements, Abrego’s attorneys argued, bolster their claims that the prosecution against him is retaliatory.

“The unprecedented public pronouncements attacking Mr. Abrego for his successful exercise of constitutional rights by senior cabinet members, leaders of the DOJ, and even the President of the United States, make this the rare case where actual vindictiveness is clear from the record,” they wrote.

Lawyers seek to curb Trump administration comments about the case

Earlier this month, Abrego’s attorneys sought, for a second time, a court order restricting government officials’ remarks about the case as prejudicial and contrary to standard court rules.

In response, U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw, who presides over the Tennessee criminal case, directed all “counsel and those working with counsel” to note in their public communications that Abrego is presumed innocent. 

“Our Constitution requires that Abrego is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury,” Crenshaw wrote in his July 31 order.

Separately, in response to Abrego’s attorney’s waiver of the right to a speedy trial, the court set a trial date of Jan. 27. 

Abrego remains in the custody of the U.S. Marshalls, who have jurisdiction over pre-trial detainees in federal cases.

Abrego has already been cleared for release pending trial by a Tennessee magistrate, an order placed on hold at the request of his attorneys amid uncertainty over whether federal immigration officials intend to detain or deport him to a “third country.”

Abrego’s attorneys on Tuesday requested the magistrate move forward with releasing him Friday, the day the hold expires. 

The attorneys noted a Maryland federal judge has barred the government from taking Abrego into immigration custody and required immigration officials to provide 72-hours written notice before removing him to a third country. 

His Tennessee lawyers, Sean Hecker and Rascoe Dean, also wrote they are “retaining a private security firm that has experience providing court-approved pre-trial transportation and security services in criminal cases to transport Mr. Abrego from Tennessee to Maryland upon release.”  

The lawyers requested details about the security arrangements be kept under seal “in order to protect Mr. Abrego’s safety.”

A federal magistrate on Wednesday set a tentative hearing for Monday if prosecutors oppose any of the conditions of Abrego’s release sought by his attorneys.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia motion to dismiss Tennessee criminal charges

Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com.

The post Kilmar Abrego Garcia attorneys seek to dismiss Tennessee case as ‘vindictive prosecution’ appeared first on tennesseelookout.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This content reflects a Center-Left bias as it emphasizes criticisms of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement, highlighting claims of “selective and vindictive prosecution” and due process concerns. The article gives attention to the legal challenges against the government’s actions and the alleged mistreatment of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, portraying his case within a broader context of systemic issues with immigration policy and enforcement under the previous administration. While presenting statements from both sides, the framing and language lean toward skepticism of the government’s motives and underscore questions of justice and human rights, themes often found in center-left reporting.