Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Deadline Legal Blog-Kilmar Abrego Garcia ruling shows how Trump's vindictive prosecutions can backfire
An independent judiciary stands in the way of the Trump administration’s use of the criminal law as a tool of revenge.
Kilmar Abrego Garcia ruling shows how Trump’s vindictive prosecutions can backfire www.msnbc.com/deadline-whi...
— @jimrissmiller.bsky.social 2025-10-07T02:43:54.375Z
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/kilmar-abrego-garcia-trump-vindictive-prosecutions-comey-mciver-rcna235940
There’s a legal hurdle standing in the way of the Trump administration’s vindictive prosecutions: the fact that it’s illegal to bring vindictive prosecutions. On that note, a recent ruling in favor of Kilmar Abrego Garcia shows that the administration’s retaliatory actions risk getting some criminal cases tossed out before they reach juries.
While the decision from a Tennessee judge is only a provisional one that lets Abrego pursue the rare issue of vindictive prosecution, it is still remarkable for going that far, given the high bar for pressing such claims. And it comes as other high-profile defendants have raised and likely will continue to raise similar claims against their apparently politically motivated charges. Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., has made such a motion in her case, and former FBI Director James Comey, who was just recently charged and will be arraigned Thursday, may do the same in his......
“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,” Crenshaw wrote. He noted that the timeline of the civil lawsuit, followed by criminal charges, “suggests that Abrego’s prosecution may stem from retaliation by the DOJ and DHS due to Abrego’s successful challenge of his unlawful deportation in Maryland.”.....
To be sure, Crenshaw hasn’t yet decided whether Abrego’s charges are vindictive or not. Rather, his ruling lets Abrego probe the issue by getting discovery — that is, by letting him investigate the issue. The scope of that discovery, what it will reveal and what the judge will do with any further revelations remain to be seen.
But regardless of what happens next, even this preliminary ruling is significant — and it might not be the last of its kind during this revenge-themed administration.
While the decision from a Tennessee judge is only a provisional one that lets Abrego pursue the rare issue of vindictive prosecution, it is still remarkable for going that far, given the high bar for pressing such claims. And it comes as other high-profile defendants have raised and likely will continue to raise similar claims against their apparently politically motivated charges. Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., has made such a motion in her case, and former FBI Director James Comey, who was just recently charged and will be arraigned Thursday, may do the same in his......
“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,” Crenshaw wrote. He noted that the timeline of the civil lawsuit, followed by criminal charges, “suggests that Abrego’s prosecution may stem from retaliation by the DOJ and DHS due to Abrego’s successful challenge of his unlawful deportation in Maryland.”.....
To be sure, Crenshaw hasn’t yet decided whether Abrego’s charges are vindictive or not. Rather, his ruling lets Abrego probe the issue by getting discovery — that is, by letting him investigate the issue. The scope of that discovery, what it will reveal and what the judge will do with any further revelations remain to be seen.
But regardless of what happens next, even this preliminary ruling is significant — and it might not be the last of its kind during this revenge-themed administration.