'Unexplained insistence': Kilmar Abrego Garcia says Trump admin wants to deport him to Africa 'to punish him' even after DHS head said he was 'happy to send him' to Costa Rica

Attorneys for Kilmar Abrego Garcia have asked a federal judge to reject the Trump administration's efforts to deport him to Liberia.

For the better part of a year, debate has raged between the federal government and the Maryland man over his ultimate geographic fate.

In August 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) floated the idea — and even said it started the process — of deporting him to Uganda, which is also in Africa. Abrego Garcia's defense team lambasted that since-abandoned plan as a threat meant to coerce a guilty plea from him in his human smuggling case, which has since been dismissed.

At the time, the Trump administration appeared to be employing a carrot-and-stick method in its motions practice. The Uganda plan was framed as the consequence of not taking a plea. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Justice said a plea deal would result in Abrego Garcia being sent to Costa Rica — but that if he did not accept the plea deal within four days "that offer will be off the table forever."

Now, 11 months later, Abrego Garcia insists that, should he be deported, Costa Rica remains the best destination.

But the Trump administration still wants to send him to Africa.

In late May of this year, U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw, Jr., a Barack Obama appointee, dismissed the human smuggling indictment and tossed the case as vindictive and selective.

Within a matter of days, Abrego Garcia told the court there were outstanding habeas corpus issues due to ongoing deportation plans. His legal team requested a court order declaring that removal or "detention for purposes of" removal "to Liberia or to any other country that is not Costa Rica violates 8 U.S.C. §1231(b)(2)."

The posture of the case has not changed much since then.

In several back-and-forth motions, the government and Abrego Garcia's team have argued for why Liberia is, and is not, a viable destination, respectively. Deadlines in the case even slipped by as the court gave Abrego Garcia, a father of three who lives in Maryland, more time to respond to the DOJ.

This week, the erstwhile defendant's team said enough was enough.

"The Government's opposition confirms the central point of Abrego Garcia's motion: the Government has no legitimate, nonpunitive reason to remove Abrego Garcia to Liberia rather than Costa Rica," the latest motion begins.

To hear the petitioner tell it, the Trump administration refuses to accommodate his request to be sent to Costa Rica simply to punish him for successfully beating the indictment. On top of that, the DOJ admits Costa Rica is both an easy lift and likely to be where Abrego Garcia ends up even if he is initially sent to Africa, the motion argues.

"The Government concedes that Costa Rica remains willing to accept Abrego Garcia and even that, if the Government forcibly removes him to Liberia, he can 'make his way to Costa R[i]ca,'" the motion goes on. "The Government nevertheless asserts that removing Abrego Garcia directly to Costa Rica would be 'prejudicial to the United States.'"

Key to Abrego Garcia's argument is an admission by DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin on the subject, the motion argues.

"[T]he Government's opposition entirely ignores that its own Secretary of Homeland Security testified before Congress that, if Abrego Garcia is willing to go to Costa Rica, 'we'll be happy to send him,'" the motion continues. "The Government filed its opposition three weeks after that testimony, but never even acknowledges it."

The filing elaborates:

If the Government is "happy" to send Abrego Garcia to Costa Rica, then detaining him and forcing him instead to Liberia is not necessary to remove him from the United States. … [T]he unexplained insistence on Liberia permits only one conclusion: the Government seeks not merely to remove Abrego Garcia from the United States, but to punish him.

The DOJ says the decision to send Abrego Garcia to Liberia was made by then-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director Todd Lyons, who was removed from his leadership role on May 31.

In its own motion, the government argues the "formal, final determination" was based on a "legitimate and bona fide reason" and therefore "marks the end of the judicial inquiry into this question."

In other words, the Trump administration believes the Liberia plan is beyond the control of the judge overseeing the remnants of the case.

Abrego Garcia's motion rejects that claim out of hand by saying the DOJ cited case law on the issue that actually undermines its claim.

"The Government does not address this, however," the motion goes on. "Nor does it confront the numerous courts that have held retaliation for the exercise of First Amendment rights—exactly what Abrego Garcia alleges the Government to have done here—is not a 'facially legitimate and bona fide' reason under [the government's cited case]."