Snips from United States v. Kilmar Abrego Garcia decision. How often do you hear "vindictive & selective prosecution?"

[Grins]

03 October 2025
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Tennessee
United States v. Kilmar Abrego Garcia

What is this case about?
Page 1, the case:

Defendant Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia’s (“Abrego”) motion to dismiss his indictment for vindictive and selective prosecution.

"...vindictive and selective prosecution?" By the vicious savages in the Trump administration and his DoJ? Can that be? Isn't that what the MAGA said about impeachment(s) and Trump trials in NY and Florida and Georgia...?

Judge Waverly Crenshaw Jr.:

Page 7.

"While many of the statements made by the Executive Official Defendants about Abrego raise cause for concern, one stands out amongst the rest. Deputy Attorney General Blache(sic) - the DOJ official responsible for overseeing the criminal division and Acting U.S. Attorney McGuire - told the public on television on the day of Abrego’s arrest that the government started “investigating” Abrego after “a judge in Maryland . . . questioned” the government’s decision to deport Abrego, found that it “had no right to deport him,” and “accus[ed] [the government] of doing something wrong.”

After a judge found that it had no right to deport him and accused the government of doing something wrong. That's when they went after him.

Page 8.

2. Presumptive Vindictiveness

... The Government had a significant stake in retaliating against Abrego’s success in the Maryland lawsuit and deterring any future efforts in that lawsuit. The potential unreasonableness of the prosecution is reflected in the timing of the Government’s conduct in March and April 2025. This is sufficient to conclude that Abrego has made a prima facie showing of “some evidence” that there is a realistic likelihood that the prosecution against him may be vindictive and Abrego is therefore entitled to discovery and a hearing.

Page 12.

"Even assuming the individual motive of Acting U.S. Attorney McGuire was pure, others’ motives, like fruit from a poisonous tree, may taint this prosecution. The Court finds Abrego has sufficiently presented some evidence that the Government had a stake in retaliating against him for exercising his rights in the Maryland suit and deterring him from continuing to exercise those rights."

Page 15.

"...the Court...grant(s) Abrego’s request for discovery and an evidentiary hearing."

Discovery gonna' be lit!!! The Trump DoJ is now on trial. Again.