A judge previously ruled that the man should not be returned to Guatemala due to his fears of persecution.
A federal judge ruled on Friday that the Trump administration must facilitate the return of an illegal immigrant from Guatemala who was deported to Mexico in February, after the government admitted to an error in its court statements about his case.
The Guatemalan native, referred to as O.C.G. in court documents, left his homeland in March 2024 and entered the United States without prior authorization to seek asylum. He was sent back to Guatemala, and two months later, O.C.G. tried to reenter the United States through Mexico.
According to court documents, O.C.G. was raped and held hostage for a ransom while in Mexico—an experience he later disclosed to a U.S. immigration judge during withholding-only proceedings.
The judge subsequently ruled that O.C.G. should not be returned to Guatemala due to his fears of persecution. Two days after being granted withholding of removal, he was placed on a bus to Mexico without being given the chance to speak to his attorney, court documents stated.
After arriving in Mexico, O.C.G. was given a choice of whether to remain in detention while applying for asylum in Mexico or be sent back to Guatemala. He chose to return to Guatemala, where he has remained since, according to court documents.
U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy said that government lawyers initially said that O.C.G. had verbally expressed that he was not afraid of being sent to Mexico, citing data entries from immigration officers.
The attorneys later admitted they could not identify any immigration officers to support that claim.
“No one has ever suggested that O.C.G. poses any sort of security threat,” Murphy stated in a 14-page order. “In general, this case presents no special facts or legal circumstances, only the banal horror of a man being wrongfully loaded onto a bus and sent back to a country where he was allegedly just raped and kidnapped.”
Murphy acknowledged that mistakes can happen but said, “the events leading up to this decision are troubling.”
“The Court was given false information, upon which it relied, twice, to the detriment of a party at risk of serious and irreparable harm,” he stated. Murphy ordered discovery, including depositions of those involved in giving the false information and related data entries.
