US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele have been directly in touch about the detention of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom the US mistakenly deported to El Salvador’s notorious megaprison, according to multiple sources familiar with the previously undisclosed discussions. A US official also told CNN the Trump administration has been working closely with El Salvador and asked for Abrego Garcia’s return but insisted that Bukele has made clear that he’s not returning him to the US, citing an Oval Office meeting between Bukele and President Donald Trump this month. It is unclear what the goal of the discussions was, however, as multiple officials told CNN the Trump administration is not seeking to return Abrego Garcia to the US or grant him any additional due process in either country. The secretive seven-day pause in Abrego Garcia’s court case last week arose because a diplomatic resolution had become a possibility, according to other sources familiar with the matter. That pause expires Wednesday afternoon, a federal judge ruled. Abrego Garcia has been moved from CECOT, officially known as the Terrorism Confinement Center, to another facility in El Salvador, but there have otherwise been few public developments in the high-stakes case. At a Cabinet meeting Wednesday at the White House, Rubio said he will “never tell” if he has been in touch with Bukele. “I would never tell you that,” Rubio responded to reporter who asked about a possible return of Abrego Garcia. “And you know who else I’ll never tell? A judge,” Rubio added, saying it was “because the conduct of our foreign policy belongs to the president of the United States and the executive branch, not some judge.” Abrego Garcia had previously been living in the US, and a judge years ago found he could be deported to anywhere but his home country of El Salvador because his life would be at risk there. The Trump administration acknowledged its mistake in court but has since argued its legal ability to send him to El Salvador has changed because he is allegedly a member of the gang MS-13, though it has produced little evidence to back up this claim. Trump said in an interview with ABC News on Tuesday that he “could” tell El Salvador to send Abrego Garcia back to the US but will not. Multiple courts have said the Trump administration appears to be ignoring the judge’s orders to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return from the prison. Earlier this month the Supreme Court ordered that the government needed to take steps to “facilitate his release from custody” but sent his case back down to the lower court for further clarification on how that could be effectuated. The high court’s ambiguous ruling, which did not directly order his return to the United States, has provided the administration cover to allow Garcia to remain in El Salvador. It’s still not clear what the possibilities might be for Abrego Garcia if there were a diplomatic deal. The New York Times reported on Wednesday that the Trump administration sent a diplomatic note to officials in El Salvador to inquire about releasing him, and Bukele said no. A source familiar with the proceedings said the Justice Department is not seeking to return Abrego Garcia to the US at this time. If he were to return, the administration likely would attempt to process him and deport him again. The Justice Department is also not expected to provide any additional due process to Garcia in El Salvador through a remote hearing or other means, according to the source. The diplomatic effort the sources referred to also may be an attempt to take the temperature down politically and legally in a case where even Trump backers have criticized the White House for depriving Abrego Garcia of due process before he was mistakenly deported. Trump, in his comments on Tuesday, pointed to the lawyers taking the lead with Abrego Garcia – indicating his intention to be removed from the political fight. “I’m not the one making this decision,” Trump told ABC News. The president also said that government lawyers do not want to help bring Abrego Garcia back to the US. And Bukele has made clear he has no plans to send Abrego Garcia out of El Salvador, especially back to the US. “I hope you’re not suggesting that I smuggle a terrorist into the United States,” Bukele said earlier this month. “How can I smuggle a terrorist into the United States? Of course I’m not going to do it. The question is preposterous.” Attorney General Pam Bondi and Justice Department lawyers in court previously have said they would take steps “domestically” to aid in Abrego Garcia’s return if El Salvador would release him. Bondi said the US would be willing to send a plane, for instance. But Judge Paula Xinis, who has handled his case in court for more than a month now and received an endorsement on her orders from Supreme Court, has said that was not enough. Judge orders discovery to restart Shortly after Xinis called out the Trump administration and Justice Department for wrongly interpreting her orders, forward movement in the court proceeding was paused and moved into confidential proceedings. That was when the diplomatic resolution was still a possibility, the sources told CNN. But a new request this week from the Justice Department to further pause the case prompted Xinis to refuse to do so on Wednesday morning. Instead, the judge put the administration back on the clock to respond to questions about Abrego Garcia’s detention in El Salvador and prior removal proceedings by this Friday. Up to six administration officials may also be interviewed under oath by Abrego Garcia’s lawyers by next week, the judge said. At least one of those depositions took place last week, according to a source familiar with the case. Abrego Garcia’s attorney, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, told CNN that “over the next week, through discovery, we’re going to be able get to the bottom of this and we’re going to figure out who is telling him not to make that phone call,” referring to Trump. Sandoval-Moshenberg said that last week, Judge Xinis appeared satisfied with the administration’s request to pause discovery, seeing it as being made in good faith. “She’s not falling for nonsense,” he said. The attorney declined to comment on Wednesday’s closed-door proceedings and whether they were prompted by Trump’s comments to ABC News. “It is clear that some person, or persons within the US government, is actively blocking other persons within the US government from complying with the judge’s order, and now we’re going to figure out who that is,” he said. CNN’s Devan Cole and Kylie Atwood contributed to this report. This story has been updated with additional developments.
Marco Rubio and Salvadoran president have been in touch about Kilmar Abrego Garcia, sources say
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Marco Rubio and Nayib Bukele Discuss Detention of Kilmar Abrego Garcia"
CNN
7.0
TruthLens AI Summary
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been in direct communication with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele regarding the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a man mistakenly deported from the United States to El Salvador, where he is currently detained in a high-security prison. According to various sources, the Trump administration has expressed a desire to secure Garcia's return to the U.S., but Bukele has firmly stated that Garcia will not be sent back. The discussions between the two leaders have been shrouded in secrecy, particularly as a recent pause in Garcia's court proceedings hinted at a potential diplomatic resolution. This pause, which is set to expire soon, has raised questions about the future of Garcia's case, as the administration appears to be navigating complex legal and diplomatic waters without a clear direction on how to proceed.
Garcia's legal situation has become increasingly complicated, given that he was previously found at risk if returned to El Salvador. While the Trump administration acknowledged the error in deporting him, it has suggested that Garcia is involved with the gang MS-13, a claim that lacks substantial evidence. The Supreme Court has mandated that the government facilitate Garcia's return, yet the administration seems to be ignoring this directive. Tensions have escalated, with Bukele publicly rebuffing any suggestions to smuggle Garcia back into the U.S. The Justice Department's position remains ambiguous, indicating no intent to provide additional due process for Garcia during his detention in El Salvador. As the court case unfolds, questions linger about the underlying motivations of both the U.S. government and the Salvadoran administration, particularly in light of criticisms from within the U.S. regarding Garcia's treatment and the legal process surrounding his deportation.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article sheds light on the interactions between U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele concerning the situation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador. The narrative suggests a complex diplomatic engagement that raises questions about U.S. foreign policy, human rights, and the implications of deportation.
Diplomatic Tensions and Objectives
The discussions between Rubio and Bukele indicate a high-stakes diplomatic dialogue. The U.S. administration's acknowledgment of a mistake in deporting Abrego Garcia is noteworthy. However, the refusal to seek his return to the U.S. might suggest a desire to maintain a specific image or strategy regarding immigration and deportation policies. It appears that the U.S. may be attempting to manage public perception while avoiding complicating legal ramifications, reflecting a broader context of strained U.S.-El Salvador relations. This could signal a potential shift in how the U.S. administration approaches deportation cases, especially in light of human rights considerations.
Public Perception and Underlying Issues
The article is likely designed to influence public perception regarding immigration policies and the treatment of deportees. By highlighting the involvement of high-profile officials and the complexities of international diplomacy, it may aim to garner sympathy for individuals like Abrego Garcia while also critiquing the administration's handling of such cases. The mention of the "notorious megaprison" in El Salvador serves to evoke a sense of danger and injustice, potentially swaying public opinion against the deportation practices being employed.
Transparency and Information Control
Rubio's comments about confidentiality in diplomatic discussions hint at a potential desire to control the narrative surrounding this case. His refusal to disclose details may indicate a strategy to keep certain elements of the situation opaque, allowing the administration to navigate the political landscape without full accountability. This lack of transparency can lead to skepticism among the public regarding the administration's intentions and the ethical implications of their decisions.
Societal and Political Ramifications
The implications of this news story are broad. It could affect public trust in government institutions, especially concerning immigration policy. If the situation escalates or if further details emerge about Abrego Garcia's treatment, it may provoke public outcry or political backlash. The administration's approach could also influence upcoming elections, as immigration remains a pivotal issue.
Target Audience
The article is likely aimed at a politically aware audience, particularly those concerned about immigration rights, human rights issues, and U.S. foreign policy. By focusing on a specific case, it attempts to engage readers who may feel strongly about the ethical considerations of deportation and the treatment of individuals in foreign prison systems.
Market Impact
While the article primarily focuses on political and social issues, its implications could extend to market reactions, particularly in sectors related to immigration law and human rights advocacy. Companies involved in legal services or advocacy may see fluctuations based on public sentiment influenced by such stories.
Global Power Dynamics
This news piece highlights the complexities of U.S.-Central America relations, which can affect broader geopolitical stability. The administration's handling of this situation may reflect its stance on foreign policy, potentially influencing how other countries view U.S. commitment to human rights.
Potential Use of AI in Reporting
It's plausible that AI tools were used to assist with data analysis or information synthesis in constructing this report. Such models could help in identifying key themes or framing the narrative in a way that aligns with intended messaging. If present, AI’s influence might be seen in the structure and clarity of the article, guiding the reader toward specific interpretations.
The article raises significant questions about the integrity of U.S. immigration policy and the ethical considerations surrounding deportation, especially concerning individuals who may face danger upon return. While the reporting appears factual, the narrative framing suggests a degree of manipulation aimed at influencing public opinion and shaping discourse around these critical issues.