GREENBELT, Md. (AP) — A federal judge in Maryland ordered Kilmar Abrego Garcia freed from immigration detention on Thursday while his legal challenge against his deportation moves forward.

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ruled that Immigration and Customs Enforcement must release Abrego Garcia from custody immediately.

“Since Abrego Garcia’s return from wrongful detention in El Salvador, he has been re-detained, again without lawful authority,” the judge wrote. “For this reason, the Court will GRANT Abrego Garcia’s Petition for immediate release from ICE custody.”

The Department of Homeland Security was highly critical of the judge’s order and vowed to oppose it, calling it “naked judicial activism” by a judge appointed by President Barack Obama, a Democrat. “This order lacks any valid legal basis, and we will continue to fight this tooth and nail in the courts,” said Tricia McLaughlin, the department’s assistant secretary.

Messages seeking comment were left with Abrego Garcia’s attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg.

Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national, has an American wife and child and has lived in Maryland for years, but he originally immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager. An immigration judge in 2019 ruled Abrego Garcia could not be deported to El Salvador because he faced danger from a gang that targeted his family. When Abrego Garcia was mistakenly deported there in March, his case became a rallying point for those who oppose President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Abrego Garcia was returned to the U.S. under a court order. Since he cannot be deported to El Salvador, ICE has been seeking to deport him to a series of African countries. His lawsuit in federal court claims Trump’s Republican administration is illegally using the deportation process to punish Abrego Garcia over the embarrassment of his mistaken deportation to El Salvador.

Meanwhile, in a separate action in immigration court, Abrego Garcia is petitioning to reopen his immigration case to seek asylum in the United States.

Related Articles

Washington state under emergency as torrential rain triggers floods, mudslides and evacuations

A sharp drop for Oracle keeps Wall Street in check as most US stocks rise

Climate change is straining Alaska’s Arctic. A new mining road may push the region past the brink

US jobless benefit applications jump to 236,000 last week as concerns about labor market persist

Open AI, Microsoft face lawsuit over ChatGPT’s alleged role in Connecticut murder-suicide

Additionally, Abrego Garcia is facing criminal charges in federal court in Tennessee, where he has pleaded not guilty to human smuggling. He has filed a motion to dismiss the charges, claiming the prosecution is vindictive.

A judge has ordered an evidentiary hearing to be held on the motion after previously finding some evidence that the prosecution against Abrego Garcia “may be vindictive.” The judge said many statements by Trump administration officials “raise cause for concern.”

The judge specifically cited a statement by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche that seemed to suggest the Justice Department charged Abrego Garcia because he won his wrongful deportation case.

One of Minnesota’s oldest industries, mining, provides important lessons for the state’s success in capturing the economic opportunities of artificial intelligence. Three lessons are especially important.

Add value

First, raw materials create immediate wealth, but sustainable prosperity is in value-added processes. Minnesota’s Iron Range produced the material for the steel that built the 20th Century and is just as vital today. But Minnesota didn’t just ship away its minerals. It also exported wealth by allowing other states and countries to dominate the value-added processing and manufacturing.

Today, AI data centers are proposed for communities throughout Minnesota. These centers are the “mines” of AI, exploiting the raw technology of the advanced chips. The centers generate revenue, but sustainable wealth is in the commercial applications of AI.

Minnesota is well-positioned to exploit the potential for value-added wealth. The state already has a strong foothold in AI research and development, advancing new uses for AI chips and improving manufacturing processes.

In addition, the state is home to the kind of industries that are among the early adopters of advanced AI. The state’s life sciences sector, for example, includes more than 7,000 companies employing 326,000 workers. Many of these are well-paying jobs in areas like medical devices, biotech and health IT. Mayo Clinic and other health leaders are well-along in adapting AI to better serve patients and customers.

Sustainable wealth, including new companies and good jobs, is in value-added applications.

Don’t protect, compete!

Second, Minnesota is not an island. In today’s economy ideas and capital move quickly around the world. Those that adapt to the global exchange of financing and expertise will be tomorrow’s job creators.

Staying competitive in a global marketplace has spurred innovation on the Iron Range. Seems something as basic as a mineral extracted from the ground wouldn’t be ripe for cutting-edge creativity. Yet, the iron ore of a century ago gave way to taconite in the mid-20th Century to a more environmentally friendly and purer iron-ore pellet today. This new pellet is essential to modern steelmaking and keeps the Iron Range viable in domestic and foreign steelmaking.

Maintaining a global market for AI chips also is essential to keeping U.S. manufacturers in the forefront of innovation and sophistication. Some policymakers have argued for export barriers and other restrictions on AI technology. A bill pending in Congress would give U.S. customers the “right of first refusal” before AI chips could be exported, according to the legislation’s lead sponsor Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN). In practice, the GAIN AI Act — Guaranteeing Access and Innovation for National Artificial Intelligence — would create a slow and ponderous process for all sales.

The GAIN AI Act and other protectionist policies undermine our incentives to stay on the cutting edge of technology. Protectionism preserves complacency; competition encourages the innovation needed to maintain leadership. U.S. manufacturers are able to compete with the world’s best. Imposing artificial barriers on the sale of AI chips is a concession by some policymakers that U.S. companies can’t compete on a level playing field. That’s not just an admission of defeat. It is a path to a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Smart science, effective policy, supportive Minnesotans

The third lesson from the Iron Range is that success takes a village, or in this case, an entire state. The Iron Range has survived the region’s boom and bust cycles with smart science, effective policy and supportive Minnesotans. When natural ore was depleted, researchers at the University of Minnesota developed new methods to mine and process taconite, a low-grade iron ore that is plentiful but more costly to produce. To offset the higher production costs, Minnesota voters approved a constitutional amendment to create a more favorable tax environment for the industry.

Minnesota’s burgeoning AI industry will need the same multi-discipline leadership. Research and training at the University of Minnesota and other post-secondary institutions will be essential to creating the knowledge, start-up companies, and workers key to the future of a globally competitive, environmentally responsible mining industry in Minnesota.

State and federal lawmakers need to develop the tax and spending policies that will support research, education and the public and private investments needed to create next-generation technology. The state’s congressional delegation, both Republican and Democrats, is needed to promote a “Minnesota First” agenda that rejects ineffective and unproductive restrictions on AI leadership like the GAIN AI Act.

Minnesota has the foundational assets to be a leader in AI manufacturing and applications. The path forward is paved with the lessons to be learned from one of the state’s defining industries.

Tom Horner is a public affairs executive and a former Independence Party candidate for governor of Minnesota.

Related Articles

Real World Economics: Making the case for bank regulations

Skywatch: Jumpin’ Geminids

Your Money: Meaningful conversations around the holidays 

Working Strategies: Deciding whether to job search in December

Joe Soucheray: Walz can’t — or won’t — explain the fraud under his watch

By JOSH FUNK and MARK VANCLEAVE, Associated Press

RANDOLPH, Minn. (AP) — When Donald Trump promised new tariffs while running for president, Gene Stehly worried that trade disputes would jeopardize his international sales of corn, soybeans and wheat.

Related Articles

Watch: Senators question military leaders on Trump’s National Guard deployments

Trump administration separates thousands of migrant families in the US

Homeland Security Secretary Noem faces scrutiny over immigration policies at a House hearing

Senate poised to reject extension of health care subsidies as costs rise for many

Trump’s handling of the economy is at its lowest point in AP-NORC polling

A little more than a year later, Stehly said his fears have become a reality, and Trump’s latest promise of federal assistance is insufficient to cover farmers’ losses.

“Maybe this will all come out to be better at the end, but I can tell you right now, it certainly isn’t the case at the moment,” Stehly said.

Trump announced Monday that his Republican administration would distribute $12 billion in one-time payments to farmers, who have suffered from persistently low commodity prices, rising costs and declining sales after China cut off all agricultural purchases from America during the trade war.

While rural areas remain conservative bastions, farmers’ patience with Washington is wearing thin. Several of them described the government bailout, an echo of similar policies during Trump’s first term, as a welcome stopgap but one that won’t solve the agricultural industry’s problems.

“It’s a bridge. It’s not the ultimate solution we’re looking for,” said Charlie Radman, a fourth-generation farmer who grows corn and soybeans on the land his family has owned near Randolph, Minnesota, since 1899. “What we really want to have is a little more certainty and not have to rely on these ad hoc payments.”

Farmers caught up in trade war

American soybean and sorghum farmers typically export at least half of their crops. They were hit the hardest by Trump’s trade dispute with China, the world’s largest buyer of soybeans that has increasingly relied on harvests from Brazil and other South American nations.

Trump and his Cabinet have boasted about the deal he struck with Chinese President Xi Jinping in October. But Liu Pengyu, the spokesperson for the Chinese embassy, said this week that “agriculture trade cooperation between China and the United States is proceeding in an orderly manner” without giving specifics.

So far, China has bought only about a quarter of the 12 million metric tons of soybeans that U.S. officials said would be purchased before the end of February, raising doubts on whether Beijing would follow through on that pledge or commitments to buy 25 million metric tons annually in the next three years. China hasn’t confirmed those numbers.

“In general, I don’t trust their motives and integrity of their promises,” said Bryant Kagay, who farms in northwest Missouri.

Even if China does buy the agreed amount of American soybeans, that would only bring U.S. farmers near to the amount they were selling every year before Trump took office.

That’s a big part of why Minnesota farmer Glen Groth said he’d “like to see the administration focus more on opening up markets outside of China.” In addition to finding other international buyers, agriculture groups are pushing to expand domestic uses like biodiesel, ethanol, aviation fuel and animal feed.

Dan Keitzer, a soybean and corn farmer in southeast Iowa, said recent bumper crops and technological advancements that produce bigger harvests means that the industry needs more customers.

“I think most farmers would tell you that they don’t want to go to the mailbox and get a check from the government. That’s not why we farm,” he said. “We need more demand for our product.”

Aid is considered a Band-Aid

Trump has placated farmers with money before. During his first term, he provided $22 billion in 2019 to help cushion them from trade disputes with China. There was $46 billion in 2020, an expanded number that reflected financial challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic.

The $12 billion that he announced this week won’t quell farmers’ fears about the future. They’re already ordering supplies for next year’s crops and meeting with their bankers to discuss the loans they will need. But they’re trying to stay optimistic that crop prices will improve if they find more buyers.

The aid payments will be capped at $155,000 per farmer or entity, and only farms that make less than $900,000 in adjusted gross income will be eligible. But during the first Trump administration a number of large farms found ways around the payment limits and collected millions.

Farmers would like to see Trump aggressively tackle concerns about higher costs that are eating into their bottom line.

Trump signed an executive order over the weekend directing the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission to investigate anti-competitive practices anywhere in the food supply chain, starting with the fertilizer, seed and equipment that farmers rely on and continuing to deal with meat packing companies and grocers who help determine what price consumers pay.

Tregg Cronin, who farms and ranches with his family in central South Dakota, said he’s grateful for the president’s acknowledgment that farmers are “caught in the middle” of the trade war.

But he said that any checks that farmers receive from the government will likely “get turned around and sent right out the door.”

Funk reported from Omaha, Neb. Associated Press writers Hannah Fingerhut in Des Moines, Iowa, Sarah Raza in Sioux Falls, S.D., and Didi Tang in Washington contributed to this report.