An order has been approved for jurisdictional exploration in the case of a Venezuelan immigrant detained in a well-known Salvadoran prison. This could unravel significant information about the Trump administration’s detainment agreement with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele.

The case of broad implications, intersecting with several nationally prominent cases, involves a petitioner named E.D.Q.C., suspected to be Edicson David Quintero Chacon, 28. He claimed he was not informed about his impending deportation to El Salvador, a nation to which he has no ties and thus was unable to dispute potential mistreatment at the nation’s Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, which has been criticized for its harsh conditions.

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

Middle District of Georgia U.S. Magistrate Judge Amelia Helmick ruled that if such allegations of a lack of notice are true, E.D.Q.C.’s transfer to and imprisonment in CECOT is “likely unlawful.” She also firmly rejected arguments by the Trump administration that certain “privileges” exist barring them from releasing information into their deal with the Salvadoran government, saying that “the only reason El Salvador has even entered the conversation in this case” is because the U.S. government sent the petitioner there.

“For Respondents to now assert that the terms of such relocation and potential detention should be shielded from Petitioner and the Court is disingenuous,” Helmick wrote in her Tuesday filing. “That is not to say that the entire panoply of relations between the United States and El Salvador is open to discovery, but the narrow matter of the terms under which Petitioner is held in El Salvador, the degree to which the United States is entitled to determine his ultimate disposition, and what involvement, if any, the United States continues to have in seeking his possible eventual repatriation to Venezuela is discoverable.”

But the impacts of this case could be far greater, largely because E.D.Q.C. has requested documents that pertain to the Trump administration’s prison deal with El Salvador as a whole.

As Helmick wrote:

“Petitioner’s requests for production 1-3 ask for documents directly related to the terms of any agreement between the United States and El Salvador to accept and detain non-United States citizens transferred from the United States to El Salvador and are relevant and proportional to the needs of the case. Therefore, the Court will allow them.”

The U.S. government has argued in this case — as it has in others, such as that of deported Maryland man Kilmar Abrego Garcia — that the deported immigrant is not in their custody and therefore they are powerless to return him. However, Helmick found that E.D.Q.C. is still in their “constructive custody” — meaning while he may not be in their “direct physical control,” his freedom is controlled by their legal authority.

The judge found that E.D.Q.C. “alleges sufficient facts to warrant discovery” on this issue. These alleged facts include: The U.S. is paying El Salvador $6 million to house immigrants the Trump administration has found to be illegally residing in the U.S.; the Central American country is housing them for one year, “pending the United States’ decision on their long term disposition”; Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem saying the CECOT prison is “one of the tools in our toolkit that we will use if you commit crimes against the American people”; and more.

Helmick specifically pointed to a line from President Donald Trump. Asked in April whether he could bring Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador, he said, “I could.”

Helmick also found “unconvincing” the arguments that the court does not have jurisdiction because she cannot command Salvadoran officials to do something.

“However, the issue is not whether the Court has jurisdiction over the warden of CECOT, or the ability to issue orders to a foreign government, but whether the Court has jurisdiction over a United States official with ‘the power to produce’ Petitioner,” she wrote.

E.D.Q.C. filed his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in February when he was detained at Stewart Detention Center in Lumpkin, Georgia, according to the order. He was deported to El Salvador the following month, and the warden of the detention center, who received the petition, threw it out. In April, the man was given pro bono counsel, and this attorney filed an amended petition, “adding multiple government officials as respondents.”

In May, these respondents sought to have the new petition thrown out, arguing, in addition to issues of jurisdiction, that the proceeding should be dismissed or stayed until the resolution of D.V.D. v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland, a class-action lawsuit against DHS for deporting noncitizens to “countries that are not their designated country of removal” without first offering them a chance to “demonstrate their fear of persecution, torture, and even death in those third countries.”

The petitioner subsequently moved for expedited jurisdictional discovery, which was granted on Tuesday. Helmick found that staying proceedings in order to wait for the other case “is not appropriate” as E.D.Q.C.’s “habeas claims are much narrower than those asserted in D.V.D.”