Kilmar Ábrego García was released from an immigration detention facility in Pennsylvania on Thursday, shortly before 5pm ET, according to his attorney, who spoke with the Associated Press. The release came after a federal judge in Maryland ordered his release following a habeas petition filed by Ábrego's lawyer.

The Maryland judge's decision was met with opposition from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which has pledged to appeal the ruling. In a statement, the DHS called the ruling "naked judicial activism," suggesting that the judge overstepped their authority. However, Ábrego's lawyer argued that the decision was a necessary step to protect his client's rights.

Ábrego, a 34-year-old undocumented immigrant, has lived in Maryland for many years with his US citizen wife and child. He first entered the country illegally as a teenager and has been a subject of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. Ábrego's case has been closely watched by immigration advocates, who see it as a test of the administration's policies.

According to Ábrego's lawyer, the Maryland judge's decision was based on the fact that Ábrego has been living in the US for many years and has a family here. The lawyer argued that deporting Ábrego would cause significant harm to his family and would be a misuse of the administration's resources.

The DHS has argued that Ábrego is a priority for deportation due to his immigration status. However, the judge's decision suggests that the administration's policies may be subject to judicial review and that the rights of undocumented immigrants may be protected in court.

Ábrego plans to return to Maryland, where he will continue to fight any additional deportation attempts on his behalf. His lawyer said that he does not yet know what will happen next but is ready to continue the fight.

The case has significant implications for the Trump administration's immigration policies, which have been the subject of controversy and criticism. The administration's efforts to crack down on undocumented immigration have been met with resistance from judges, lawmakers, and advocacy groups, who argue that the policies are inhumane and ineffective.

As the case continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how the DHS will respond to the judge's decision. The administration has pledged to appeal the ruling, but it is unclear what the outcome will be. One thing is certain, however: Ábrego's case has become a lightning rod for the debate over immigration policy in the US.