BALTIMORE (AP) — A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order preventing U.S. immigration officials from re-detaining Kilmar Abrego Garcia, shortly after his release from immigration detention. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ruled that officials cannot detain him until a hearing on the motion for a temporary restraining order is conducted. This decision came after Abrego Garcia attended a scheduled appointment at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) field office, approximately 14 hours following his release.

Abrego Garcia has become a notable figure in discussions surrounding the Trump administration's immigration policies, particularly after he was mistakenly deported to a high-security prison in El Salvador earlier this year. He was last taken into custody in August during a similar check-in. At a news conference outside the ICE office, he expressed gratitude for his release and emphasized the importance of fighting against injustices faced by individuals in similar situations, stating, "I stand before you a free man and I want you to remember me this way, with my head held up high."

The judge's order followed a recent action by an immigration judge that appeared to add a removal order to Abrego Garcia's immigration record, despite his previous release. Judge Xinis ruled that the government could not detain him because he had never been issued a valid removal order. The immigration judge, Philip Taylor, had claimed that a removal order was erroneously omitted from a 2019 hearing, which had previously barred his deportation due to fears of persecution from gangs in El Salvador.

Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran citizen with a U.S. citizen wife and child, had been granted protection from deportation due to threats from gangs. His legal troubles escalated after his wrongful deportation, which drew public scrutiny and legal challenges against the administration's actions. Following his deportation, he was brought back to the U.S. to face human smuggling charges, to which he has pleaded not guilty.

The Department of Homeland Security criticized the judge's ruling, labeling it as judicial activism and indicating plans to appeal. The assistant secretary of the department stated that the order lacks a valid legal basis and that they would continue to contest it vigorously. This case underscores the complexities and contentious nature of immigration enforcement and the legal battles that ensue, raising concerns about the treatment of individuals within the immigration system and the implications for human rights.