In a significant legal setback for the Trump administration, a federal court has ruled against the attempt to redetain Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an individual who was erroneously deported to an El Salvadoran slave labor camp. The court's decision underscores the administration's limited authority to alter immigration detention rights after statutory periods have expired.

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis dismissed the government's argument, often referred to as the "let’s just ignore the last year" theory, which sought to invalidate the elapsed 90-day removal period that initially justified the detention of Abrego Garcia. Judge Xinis emphasized that such retrospective adjustments to his immigration record do not reinstate expired detention rights.

The ruling also highlighted the administration's subsequent actions, which included threats of deporting Abrego Garcia to various African countries—threats that Judge Xinis labeled as "phantom removals" with "no real chance of success." This approach was contrasted starkly with the administration's disregard for Costa Rica, a country willing to accept Abrego Garcia and one he was prepared to enter.

Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, representing Abrego Garcia, expressed hope that the government would not appeal the decision. "If the government were truly trying to remove Mr. Abrego Garcia from the United States, they would have sent him to Costa Rica long before today," he stated, advocating for a resolution that aligns with his client's preferences and legal rights.

This court decision not only challenges the Trump administration's handling of this specific case but also sets a precedent about the limitations of executive power in rewriting history or altering substantive legal rights. The ruling serves as a reminder that legal principles concerning detention and deportation are bound by statutory time limits, beyond which governmental authority is constrained.