U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis rebukes the Justice Department’s representation, accusing attorneys of undermining their own case in the wrongful‐deportation litigation.

Judge Delivers Verbal Rebuke to DOJ

July 11, 2025: During a high-stakes hearing over the wrongful deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis sharply criticized a DOJ lawyer for presenting flawed arguments and inaccurate statements. At one point, the judge exclaimed, “You’ve destroyed it,” highlighting her frustration with repeated missteps undermining the government’s credibility and legal position.

Comparisons to “Nailing Jello to a Wall”

Judge Xinis likened trying to extract coherent positions from the Department of Justice to “nailing jello to a wall”, referring to inconsistent, shifting legal arguments from the administration. DOJ attorneys repeatedly contradicted themselves, citing changing narratives about Abrego’s eligibility for return and future handling.

Government Repeatedly Shifting Positions

Abrego’s legal team highlighted the DOJ’s changing stances: initially stating the Trump administration lacked authority to return him, later suggesting deportation to a third country was imminent. Judge Xinis pressed DOJ to explain these contradictions, saying even their own timelines seemed crafted post hoc.

DOJ Witness Lacked Answers

When called to testify, a senior ICE official assigned to the case offered little relevant information. The judge expressed frustration when the official claimed to have no firsthand knowledge of basic facts—the sort of confusion she deemed unacceptable for such a critical case.

Whistleblower Accounts Corroborate Disarray

The testimony echoed previously unsealed internal emails and text messages that former DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni submitted, suggesting senior officials may have proposed ignoring court orders to expedite deportations. These records underscore concerns about political interference and institutional disregard for legal directives.

Why This Hearing Matters

Exposes deep procedural breakdowns in DOJ’s legal strategy.

Demonstrates how inconsistent legal positions can erode institutional trust.

Spotlights concerns about political influence in immigration enforcement and judicial compliance.

Judge Xinis’s brutal reprimand—*“You’ve destroyed it”—*serves as a stark rebuke to DOJ behavior in Abrego Garcia’s case. Amid shifting narratives and procedural missteps, the government’s credibility faces serious scrutiny as the wrongful-deportation saga continues.