Judge to hear arguments over whether Kilmar Abrego Garcia is being vindictively prosecuted
Kilmar Abrego Garcia (R) and his wife Jennifer Vasquez Sura (L) attend a prayer vigil before he enters a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) field office on August 25, 2025 in Baltimore, Maryland. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — A federal judge in Tennessee will hear arguments Thursday over whether the government is being vindictive in pursuing a human smuggling case against Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
The hearing comes after the judge, Waverly Crenshaw Jr., canceled the trial in the case in December and wrote in a court order that there was enough evidence to hold a hearing on the question of vindictive prosecution.
The government is currently blocked from deporting Abrego Garcia, who was released from immigration detention in December. In a separate case last week, a federal judge ruled that Immigration and Customs Enforcement cannot re-detain him because his 90-day detention period had expired and the government lacked a viable plan for his deportation.
The Salvadoran native, who had been living in Maryland with his wife and children, was deported in March to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison — despite a 2019 court order barring his deportation to that country due to fear of persecution. The Trump administration claimed he was a member of the criminal gang MS-13, which he and his attorneys deny.
He was brought back to the U.S. in June to face human smuggling charges in Tennessee, to which he pleaded not guilty.
After being released into the custody of his brother in Maryland pending trial, he was again detained by immigration authorities before being released in December.
A billboard in Times Square calls for the release of the Epstein Files on July 23, 2025 in New York City. (Photo by Adam Gray/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Justice on Thursday released three previously withheld FBI interview reports from 2019 related to a woman who made uncorroborated allegations that she was abused by Donald Trump in the 1980s, when she was a minor.
In a statement on social media, the Department of Justice said the interview summaries — known as FBI 302 reports — were initially withheld from the January release of millions of pages of DOJ documents related to Jeffrey Epstein because they were believed to be duplicative of other documents.
“What we found through extensive review is that a published 302 — additionally disclosed in a published spreadsheet — had subsequent 302s that were coded as ‘duplicative.’ After this was brought to our attention, we reviewed the entire batch with the similar coding and discovered 15 documents were incorrectly coded as duplicative,” the DOJ account said.
The statement did not appear to explain why, beyond possible human error, the records were marked as duplicative. As of Thursday evening, the DOJ database still does not include the handwritten notes from the interviews themselves.
According to the reports, the FBI interviewed the woman four times between July and October 2019. During each of the interviews with the woman, whose identity is redacted, she made allegations of abuse against Epstein.
In her second interview with federal investigators, she claimed that Epstein once took her to either New York or New Jersey where he introduced to Trump when she was between the ages of 13 and 15 years old. According to the report, she claimed Trump abused her during that trip.
In the fourth interview in October 2019, the woman declined to provide additional details about the alleged interaction with Trump when asked by agents, according to the summary of that interview.
Her statements to the federal agents allege that the incident with Trump took place in the early-to-mid 1980s — a period when Epstein and Trump did not appear to be in contact.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing related to his relationship with Epstein or any knowledge of Epstein’s criminal activity.
In her initial interview with the FBI, the woman claims she was sexually abused by Epstein after being hired for what she thought was a babysitting job, but she said there were no children present. Similar abuse occurred, she said, on several more occasions, according to the summary of the first report, which was released by the DOJ in January.
The witness said multiple alleged incidents with Epstein took place in South Carolina, a location not known to have been frequented by Epstein. The timing of the allegations would place them two decades before law enforcement in Florida began investigating Epstein for sexual exploitation of minors.
Before the additional records were released Thursday, Congressional Democrats had accused the Justice Department of illegally withholding the documents to protect the president.
“It is unconscionable, it is illegal, and [Attorney General] Pam Bondi and the president need to answer where those files are,” California Democrat Robert Garcia, D-Calif. said last week.
In a statement in January, the Department of Justice said that some investigative files in the massive tranche released would include unsubstantiated claims about Trump.
“Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election. To be clear, the claims are unfounded and false, and if they have a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already,” the statement said.
A memorial dedicated to the 19 children and two adults murdered on May 24, 2022 during a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School is seen on January 06, 2026 in Uvalde, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
(CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas) — As soon as Wednesday afternoon, a Texas jury will begin deliberating whether a law enforcement officer should be held criminally responsible for failing to act in the face of one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history.
After nine days of testimony, prosecutors and defense lawyers in the trial of former Uvalde schools police officer Adrian Gonzales are scheduled to deliver their closing arguments in a Corpus Christi courtroom on Wednesday morning. Deliberations could begin as early as Wednesday afternoon.
At issue is whether Gonzales — one of the first officers to arrive at Robb Elementary on May 24, 2022 — ignored his training and endangered dozens of students when he responded to the shooting.
Prosecutors allege he “intentionally, knowingly, recklessly and with criminal negligence” put children in danger by failing to “engage, distract, and delay the shooter” in the critical first minutes of the shooting. If convicted on all 29 counts, Gonzales could spend the rest of his life in prison.
Nineteen students and two teachers died in the shooting nearly four years ago, with police officers waiting 77 minutes to confront the gunman as he was holed up inside a double classroom with students and teachers. While the shooting response has been the subject of hearings and investigations, the case against Gonzales marks the first criminal trial related to the shooting and the delayed police response.
What is he charged with? Gonzales was charged with 29 felony counts of abandoning/endangering children – one count for each of the 19 students who died in the shooting and the 10 children who survived in classroom 112.
Each count carries a maximum penalty of two years in prison, and Gonzales could spend the rest of his life in prison if he is convicted. While juries in Texas sometimes determine criminal sentences, Gonzales has opted to be sentenced by Judge Sid Harle if he is convicted.
What happened to the police chief’s case? Along with Gonzales, prosecutors also charged former Uvalde schools Police Chief Pete Arredondo, who was the scene commander during the Robb shooting. His case has been indefinitely delayed due to a pending civil lawsuit involving the tactical unit that ultimately breached the classroom and killed the shooter.
Why is the trial in Corpus Christi? Judge Sid Harle began overseeing the case after a local judge in Uvalde recused themselves from the matter.
Taking place 200 miles from Uvalde, the trial is being held in a Corpus Christi courtroom after Gonzales’ attorneys successfully argued he would be unable to have a fair trial in the county where the shooting took place.
Who is in the jury? While emotions flared during jury selection — with some now-disqualified jurors vocally criticizing the police response to cheers from other jurors — Harle was able to seat a jury in less than a day.
The jury and alternates included 11 women and five men, though one of the male jurors was excused last week due to a family emergency.
Are there any comparable cases? According to Phil Stinson — a professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio who maintains a database of police officers who have been arrested — the case against Gonzales is uncommon but not unprecedented.
Prosecutors in Florida attempted to similarly charge a law enforcement officer for his response to the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Seventeen were killed when a gunman opened fire that day, Feb. 14, 2018, in Parkland.
A jury in 2023 acquitted Scot Peterson, a former Broward County sheriff’s deputy, after he was charged with child neglect and culpable negligence for his alleged inaction following the shooting.
How did prosecutors approach the case? Prosecutors called three dozen witnesses — including investigators, teachers, and the families of victims — over nine days of testimony to argue that Gonzales missed a critical opportunity to stop the shooter before he entered Robb Elementary. They allege he was one of the first to respond to the shooter, was explicitly told the location of the gunman before he entered the school but failed to act.
“I told him that he needed to get stopped before he went into the fourth-grade building. We needed to stop him,” teaching aide Melodye Flores testified.
“And what did he say?” prosecutor Bill Turner asked.
“He, just, nothing,” Flores said.
According to a Texas Ranger who testified for prosecutors, Gonzales had more than a minute to stop the shooter before he entered the school, and the gunman was able to fire more than a hundred rounds during a two-minute period while Gonzales was standing outside Robb Elementary.
How did defense lawyers approach the case? Defense lawyers spent less than three hours on Tuesday calling two witnesses before resting their case. Gonzales declined to testify in his own defense.
His lawyers have argued that Gonzales not only followed his training that day but also highlighted that other officers had similar — if not better — opportunities to stop the shooter.
They accused prosecutors of “Monday-morning quarterbacking” Gonzales’ actions that day and argued he acted appropriately based on the limited information he had in the moment. They also highlighted that Gonzales attempted to enter the building with other officers but was directed by his commanding officer to retreat to call in for SWAT support.
Mesa County Clerk and Colorado Republican candidate for secretary of state Tina Peters reacts to early election returns during a primary night watch party at the Wide Open Saloon on June 28, 2022 in Sedalia, Colorado. (Marc Piscotty/Getty Images)
(MESA COUNTY, Colo.) — A Colorado appeals court has overturned the prison sentence of Tina Peters, the former Colorado county clerk who was convicted in a scheme to breach voting systems in search of evidence of election fraud in 2020.
In its decision on Thursday, the appeals court upheld Peters’ conviction but ordered her case to be sent to a lower court for a judge to issue a new sentence.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
