Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

The United States government has reaffirmed its position that it plans to deport Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Liberia, despite arguments that doing so would be vindictive.On Tuesday, lawyers for the administration of President Donald Trump told US federal judge Paula Xinis that it remains committed to Liberia as a destination.Abrego Garcia, however, has said that, if he must be deported, he would prefer to be sent to Costa Rica, and the government there has indicated it would accept him.But the Trump administration’s insistence on sending Abrego Garcia to Africa has raised questions about its motive.Critics have accused the US government of seeking retribution against Abrego Garcia, whose case has spurred scrutiny over the legality of Trump’s mass deportation campaign.The case began with a high-profile mistake. In March 2025, less than three months into Trump’s second term, Abrego Garcia was wrongfully deported to his native El Salvador, in violation of a 2019 protection order that found he could face gang violence if returned to the country.The Trump administration, at the time, described Abrego Garcia’s removal as an “administrative error”.Still, it initially refused to seek his return, arguing that Abrego Garcia was a gang member and that, once abroad, he was subject to El Salvador’s leadership. Abrego Garcia, though, had no criminal record at the time of his deportation.Abrego Garcia was imprisoned, first at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Centre (CECOT) and later in a second prison in Santa Ana, El Salvador.Meanwhile, lawyers in the US had turned to US courts to reverse his deportation.In early April 2025, Judge Xinis ruled that the US government had to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return to the country, and later that month, the US Supreme Court upheld her ruling in a unanimous decision.But it was only in June 2025 that Abrego Garcia was brought back to the US. In announcing Abrego Garcia’s return, the Trump administration revealed it would be filing criminal charges against him for human smuggling.He pleaded not guilty, but was forced to remain in jail. The Trump administration had deemed him a flight risk, and his own lawyers feared that stepping out of his jail cell would land him in immigration detention instead.When a court ordered his release in August, this is exactly what happened: Immigration agents took him back into custody within days.Authorities at the time said they would deport him to Uganda. Later, they changed the proposed destination to Liberia.Abrego Garcia was ultimately freed from immigration detention in December, but he continues to fight both his criminal charges and his deportation proceedings.At Tuesday’s hearing, Judge Xinis questioned why the Trump administration would not consider deporting Abrego Garcia to Costa Rica instead of Liberia.She pointed out that the country had recently inked an agreement to accept 25 removals from the US per week.In response, Ernesto Molina, the director of the Justice Department’s Office of Immigration Litigation, suggested that Abrego Garcia could “remove himself” to Costa Rica.But Xinis called the proposal a “fantasy” and noted that he cannot leave as long as the Justice Department is prosecuting him on criminal charges. He is legally required to attend his criminal hearings.After the tense exchange, Xinis set another hearing on the matter for April 28.

The USAID agency was a primary financial backer of Liberia's eco-guards, who help protect species from poaching and trafficking. The eco-guards, all of whom live in forest communities, patrol for signs of illegal activity and share their findings with rangers from nearby parks and forests.In late January 2025, the SCNL learned that USAID, the eco-guards' primary financial backer, was being dismantled by the Trump administration and that funding had been abruptly suspended. The SCNL programme manager, Michael E Taire, a Liberian who lives in the capital, Monrovia, spent several days travelling over rough forest roads to break the news to the eco-guards, who were shocked and distraught.Conservation organisations large and small lost tens of millions of dollars, forcing some to function with a fraction of the resources they had expected and others to shut down programmes entirely. Efforts to address the root causes of wildlife trafficking across the globe were axed, as was USAID's forest-protection programme in the Congo basin of central Africa, one of the agency's largest and most enduring endeavours.David Kaimowitz, a longtime advocate of community-led conservation in the Amazon basin and Central America, puts it bluntly: 'We’re talking about an end to a whole era of conservation.'Diane Russell, an American anthropologist who has worked for USAID in the Congo basin since the 1980s, says the agency helped draw international attention and funding to the region’s remarkably rich remaining forests, which are home to mountain gorillas and forest elephants. It also enabled conservation to continue through extraordinarily difficult conditions.'The callous glee with which [the Trump] administration choked off aid is something I will never forgive or forget,' Kevin Starr writes.'We cannot replace USAID, but we can do big things, because we, the locals, were the engine behind what USAID was doing in this region,' Dida Fayo says.