In a recent development straining U.S.-El Salvador relations, President Nayib Bukele has reiterated his refusal to repatriate Kilmar Abrego García, a Salvadoran national deported from Maryland in 2019.

A Growing Diplomatic Rift

In a bold move that underscores growing tensions between El Salvador and the United States, President Nayib Bukele has refused to comply with a U.S. Supreme Court decision mandating the return of Kilmar Abrego García, a Salvadoran man who was deported from Maryland in 2019. Bukele stated publicly that he will not facilitate the re-entry of someone he described as a “confirmed terrorist,” despite the U.S. judiciary’s findings and ongoing legal challenges.

The Case of Kilmar Abrego García

García, a Salvadoran national with lawful U.S. residency and established family ties in Maryland, was deported during the Trump administration under accusations of gang affiliation with MS-13. However, those allegations have not been substantiated in court. In fact, recent reports indicate that his deportation was the result of what U.S. officials now concede was an “administrative error” attributed to a Justice Department attorney who has since been dismissed.

Despite this, Bukele remains defiant, asserting that García poses a security threat and has no place returning to U.S. soil. His comments have sparked backlash from U.S. legal and human rights organizations who argue that the due process rights of García were violated.

Historical Parallels: The Case of General José Guillermo García

This situation echoes a prior case involving General José Guillermo García, El Salvador’s former Minister of Defense. In 2016, García was deported from the United States after a federal court ruled he was complicit in serious human rights violations during El Salvador’s civil war in the 1980s. These included the infamous assassination of Archbishop Óscar Romero and the El Mozote massacre. The U.S. had allowed García to live in Florida for over 25 years before reversing course due to mounting legal and moral pressure.

Legal Implications and Sovereignty Conflicts

Bukele’s refusal to allow García’s return highlights the complexities at the intersection of international law, deportation policy, and national sovereignty. While the U.S. Supreme Court ruling is binding within the American legal system, El Salvador is under no international legal obligation to accept the return of a deportee it considers a national security risk.

This standoff raises questions about the enforcement power of U.S. court rulings abroad and the limits of judicial influence in the realm of foreign diplomacy. Legal scholars warn that the situation sets a troubling precedent: What happens when foreign governments defy U.S. courts, especially on matters involving human rights and immigration?

Broader Impact on U.S.–El Salvador Relations

This dispute comes at a time when the Biden administration is seeking to stabilize relations with Central American nations and reduce migratory pressure at the southern border. Bukele’s hardline stance complicates those efforts and signals a shift toward more assertive, independent foreign policy from El Salvador.

For now, the fate of Kilmar Abrego García remains in limbo. But one thing is clear: this legal standoff is more than just a deportation dispute—it’s a bellwether of changing tides in international law, accountability, and the limits of U.S. influence abroad.