• Kilmar Abrego Garcia's lawyers argue that the prosecution is vindictive and selective.
• They claim charges stem from his challenge to a wrongful deportation.
• The DOJ allegedly seeks to punish him for pursuing civil remedies against the government.
• Abrego Garcia has been in custody since his return to the U.S. in June.
• His attorneys are seeking his release ahead of trial while fighting the charges.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia's lawyers filed a motion to dismiss criminal charges, asserting that the prosecution is "vindictive and selective," aimed at punishing him for challenging his deportation. The attorneys allege that Garcia, a Salvadoran national, has been targeted "because he refused to acquiesce in the government's violation of his due process rights," according to statements from his legal representatives. They argue that this prosecution was initiated in response to his legal challenges against the U.S. government for his wrongful deportation to El Salvador, where he faced harsh conditions in prison, according to CBS News and ABC News.

The legal filing, which spans 25 pages, details that the charges against Garcia emerged after he was brought back to the U.S. following his deportation. His attorneys argue that Garcia was not apprehended for legitimate concerns but rather as part of a "shock-and-awe immigration enforcement push." Furthermore, his deportation to a prison regarded as particularly brutal, combined with the lack of criminal charges prior to his deportation, underscores claims of selective prosecution, as stated in the motion and confirmed by HuffPost.

During his time in Tennessee custody, Garcia's lawyers have highlighted that he has pleaded not guilty to the charges of conspiracy to transport undocumented migrants, which they insist are unfounded and serve as retaliation for his legal actions against the government. They cite a specific incident from 2022, where law enforcement stopped Garcia without issuing any traffic violations, to support their argument that he had long been targeted once he began to challenge the legal processes surrounding his deportation, according to both ABC News and CBS News.

In their motion, Garcia's legal team describes the prosecution as a coordinated effort by the previous administration to retaliate against him for refusing to remain silent about his treatment. They express that any attempt to convict him should be dismissed, stressing that this case exemplifies a clear violation of constitutional rights, as reiterated in statements to HuffPost. The arguments raised highlight wider implications on how the DOJ handles cases involving challenging actions against government protocols and the retaliatory nature seen in this prosecution.