For the past month, Maryland’s Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen has been at the forefront of an international controversy as he champions the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national wrongfully detained by the Trump Administration in El Salvador while he was living in Maryland.
In a recent conversation with TIME on Wednesday, following President Trump’s comments during an ABC News interview about potentially releasing Garcia but choosing not to, Van Hollen voiced his disappointment. After meeting with Garcia in El Salvador earlier that month, he criticized Trump’s inaction, stating, “We are in a constitutional crisis,” and emphasizing the Supreme Court’s ruling that required the Trump Administration to “facilitate” Garcia’s return. Trump also mentioned to TIME that he had not asked El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele to help bring Garcia back, saying, “I haven’t been asked to ask him by my attorneys.”
Trump made unfounded allegations that Garcia is linked to the MS-13 gang, a claim stemming from a manipulated image of his tattoos that circulated online. “If he were the person you say he is, I would do that,” Trump asserted in the ABC interview, adding, “But he’s not.”
In addition, Van Hollen has called for a boycott of tourism to El Salvador, which is currently receiving $6 million from the U.S. government to assist in housing deported immigrants. He stated, “Until the government of El Salvador ceases its collusion with the Trump Administration to violate constitutional rights, people should think twice about traveling to El Salvador.” Van Hollen noted that he learned from El Salvador’s Vice President that Garcia was being detained due to a financial arrangement with the Trump Administration concerning deportees.
Here are Van Hollen’s insights shared with TIME regarding the implications for the constitutional rights of all Americans in the case of Abrego Garcia.
This interview has been shortened and edited for clarity.
In the ABC interview, Trump stated that he could arrange for Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s return if he wished to. What was your reaction to that?
My reaction is that President Trump has acknowledged what we all recognize: he has the power to comply with the Supreme Court ruling and ensure Garcia’s return. By admitting he could take action, he also concedes that he is defying a court order.
Before we explore that further, during our recent interview, Trump claimed he was delegating this matter to his legal team. How do you feel about the President of the United States saying he isn’t making the decision?
He’s merely attempting to deflect responsibility. This is a president who professes that the buck stops with him, yet when confronted with tough questions, he shifts the blame to others in his administration. He is clearly trying to avoid accountability for his ongoing violations of court orders and constitutional rights.
Are you familiar with who is leading the legal team on this issue? Have you attempted to contact them?
I’m not entirely sure. We do know that the initial attorney representing Trump in this case admitted in federal court that the Trump Administration wrongfully imprisoned Garcia in El Salvador, and that attorney faced repercussions for being truthful. Since then, I have not tracked who is currently voicing the administration’s position. However, I did witness Attorney General Bondi during a meeting in the Oval Office with President Bukele, asserting that the U.S. would be willing to send a plane to El Salvador to bring Garcia back. They ought to follow through on that.
Trump also told TIME that he hasn’t been urged to ask President Bukele to facilitate Garcia’s return. However, the Supreme Court ruled that his administration must “facilitate” his return. What is your take on Trump’s comment, and do you see our nation facing a constitutional crisis?
The President’s remarks show a clear disregard for a court order. We are indeed facing a constitutional crisis when the Trump Administration disregards the Constitution and due process rights while refusing to comply with a court ruling. It is rare to witness a unanimous decision from the Supreme Court accompanied by such a strong opinion from the Fourth Circuit.
You’ve stated that the sole reason El Salvador is detaining Garcia is due to an agreement with the U.S. What can Trump do to rectify this situation?
He can simply indicate that El Salvador is not obligated to unlawfully detain Garcia. This isn’t just my assertion; the Vice President of El Salvador explicitly told me that their government is holding Garcia because the Trump Administration is compensating them for doing so. It couldn’t be clearer. The decision ultimately rests with us—the United States.
You recently wrote a letter to Trump about this issue. What were your key messages?
I stressed that this case extends beyond just one individual—Kilmar Abrego Garcia. It poses a risk to all of us; when one person’s constitutional rights are violated, it endangers the rights of every American. I detailed the circumstances surrounding Garcia’s case and reminded the President that his own administration recognized his wrongful deportation. I also recounted my discussion with the Vice President of El Salvador, which clearly indicated that the Trump Administration could facilitate Garcia’s return and was willfully ignoring court orders.
Have you received a reply to that letter? Do you expect one?
I haven’t received a response yet, but we did witness in the ABC interview that the President publicly acknowledged he could easily make a phone call to facilitate Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release.
Are you planning another trip to El Salvador to check on him and advocate for his release?
I will persist in advocating for Mr. Abrego Garcia’s constitutional due process rights, utilizing any effective means at my disposal. I want to clarify that I’m not endorsing Mr. Abrego Garcia; I’m advocating for his rights, as they reflect the rights of everyone.
What steps can Congress or Democrats take regarding Abrego Garcia’s situation and similar deportation cases?
We can continue to emphasize that the President and his Administration are violating the Constitution. Recent polls indicate that the American public sees through his narrative and recognizes that their own constitutional rights are at stake in this matter. If one person’s rights can be infringed upon, then so can anyone’s. Additionally, we can exert economic pressure on the Salvadoran government, as President Bukele is particularly concerned about maintaining economic stability. Therefore, I’ve suggested that American tourists consider spending their money elsewhere. There are numerous beautiful destinations in Central America, such as Costa Rica and Guatemala. Until the Salvadoran government halts its collusion with the Trump Administration to violate constitutional rights, I urge people to avoid El Salvador. I’ve also encouraged states to withdraw pension fund investments from businesses in El Salvador, and the Governor of Illinois has expressed intent to pursue this. Lastly, I’m working with colleagues to explore further actions to apply pressure on the Salvadoran government.
Trump has reiterated the unfounded claim that Abrego Garcia is connected to MS-13, a group the Administration designates as a foreign terrorist organization. How do you respond to Trump’s assertions during the ABC interview regarding the tattoo image as proof of gang affiliation?
As you are aware, this allegation has been thoroughly debunked by multiple fact-checkers. My consistent position, including in my letter to the President, is that the administration must present any evidence in a court of law rather than relying on social media. Enough speculation—let’s address these issues in a courtroom, where testimony is given under oath. I would also like to reiterate that U.S. District Court Judge Xinis confirmed that the Trump Administration has provided “no evidence linking Abrego Garcia to MS-13 or any terrorist activity.” So let’s move beyond the social media claims and resolve this through legal channels.
