This article was originally published on Crafting Your Home. A human contributor also wrote and edited the post.
A Mexican national serving decades in prison for killing 25-year-old Ruby Garcia has filed a federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump, arguing that the use of his case during the 2024 presidential campaign caused humiliation and emotional distress.
Brandon Ortiz-Vite is seeking $75 million in damages, a public apology and an order granting him U.S. citizenship. His handwritten complaint also names White House official Steven Cheung as a defendant.
Ortiz-Vite pleaded guilty in 2024 to second-degree murder and other offenses connected to Garcia’s death in Grand Rapids. A Michigan judge later sentenced him to between 39 and 102 years in prison, meaning he will remain incarcerated for decades before becoming eligible for release. The new civil lawsuit does not challenge that sentence or overturn his murder conviction.
The filing brings renewed attention to a devastating domestic violence case that became part of a national political argument over immigration and border security. Garcia was killed after an argument inside a vehicle on U.S. 131, where investigators said Ortiz-Vite shot her, removed her body and drove away in her car. Her death was later highlighted by Trump as he campaigned in Michigan, one of the most closely contested states in the 2024 presidential race.
Prisoner Says Campaign Attention Caused Humiliation
The lawsuit was filed July 13, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan. The federal docket identifies Ortiz-Vite as a self-represented plaintiff and lists Trump and Cheung as the defendants. Court records classify the lawsuit as an assault, libel and slander case, although no judge has ruled that either defendant committed wrongdoing.
Ortiz-Vite argues that Trump’s speeches and campaign advertisements transformed him into a nationally recognized political symbol. He claims his immigration history, mugshot and criminal case were used to support Trump’s criticism of federal border policies.
According to the complaint, that publicity led to ridicule from other prisoners and staff members and left him feeling that his identity had been reduced to his race, immigration status and crime.
The convicted killer also alleges that the intense publicity surrounding the case affected his emotional condition while he was awaiting the outcome of the criminal proceedings.
He maintains that being featured in political advertising made his experience in custody more humiliating and difficult. Those statements remain allegations made by Ortiz-Vite, and the federal court has not accepted them as proven facts.
Ortiz-Vite is requesting counseling, payment of his court costs, millions of dollars in damages, and a formal apology. He is also asking for naturalization, describing citizenship as one of the remedies he believes the court should provide. The unusual combination of demands has placed the lawsuit under intense public scrutiny, particularly because he remains imprisoned for Garcia’s murder.
Ruby Garcia’s Murder Became a National Campaign Issue
Garcia was found fatally shot along U.S. 131 in Grand Rapids on March 22, 2024. Investigators determined that she and Ortiz-Vite had been arguing about their relationship while sitting inside a vehicle.
He shot her in the head, removed her body from the car, and left the scene before later confessing, according to accounts presented during the criminal case.
Ortiz-Vite pleaded guilty in September 2024 rather than taking the case to trial. Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker said Garcia’s family supported the agreement because it avoided the uncertainty of a trial and ensured a lengthy prison sentence. At sentencing, Judge Mark Trusock described the killing as intentional and said Ortiz-Vite represented a danger to society.
The court imposed a minimum term of 39 years, with a maximum sentence of 102 years. Ortiz-Vite apologized during the hearing and said his actions did not represent immigrants as a group. The judge nevertheless emphasized the deliberate nature of the crime and the need to protect the public.
Trump discussed Garcia’s killing during an April 2024 campaign visit to Grand Rapids while attacking the Biden administration’s immigration record. His campaign presented Ortiz-Vite’s case as an example of the consequences of unauthorized entry and inadequate border enforcement.
The timing of Ortiz-Vite’s return to the country after his 2020 deportation, however, has not been publicly established, making it unclear whether he returned during the final months of Trump’s first administration or during Joe Biden’s presidency.
Federal Docket Shows an Early-Stage Civil Case
The case is officially listed as Ortiz-Vite v. Trump et al., case number 2:2026cv00156. U.S. District Judge Jane Beckering is listed as the presiding judge, while Magistrate Judge Maarten Vermaat received the referral. The docket showed an initial complaint, a request to proceed without prepaying court fees, and an administrative referral, but no decision on the substance of the claims.
Filing a complaint does not mean that its accusations have been verified or that the defendants are liable. Federal courts routinely review complaints submitted by prisoners before requiring defendants to formally respond, particularly when the plaintiff requests permission to proceed without paying filing fees.
A judge may allow the case to continue, request additional information, or dismiss claims that fail to identify a valid legal basis.
Ortiz-Vite appears to argue that Trump and Cheung caused reputational and emotional harm by publicizing truthful details about his immigration status and criminal prosecution.
The complaint reportedly does not challenge the basic fact that he killed Garcia or that he pleaded guilty to murder. Instead, it focuses on the consequences of becoming a recurring figure in campaign speeches, television coverage, and political advertising.
A former federal prosecutor consulted about the filing said public embarrassment alone generally does not establish a constitutional violation. The legal questions could also include whether the disputed statements were substantially true, whether the complaint identifies a recognized cause of action, and whether any form of immunity applies.
Those issues will be decided by the court only if the case survives its initial review.
Citizenship Demand Faces a Major Legal Barrier
The demand for U.S. citizenship faces an especially serious obstacle under federal immigration law. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services states that anyone convicted of murder at any time is permanently barred from establishing the good moral character required for naturalization.
Ortiz-Vite’s guilty plea and murder conviction therefore directly conflict with a central eligibility requirement.
Federal law generally gives the executive branch authority over naturalization applications, with limited court review available through specific legal procedures. A civil damages lawsuit does not ordinarily replace the established application, examination, and eligibility process.
The court hearing Ortiz-Vite’s complaint would therefore have to consider not only what he requested, but whether it possesses legal authority to award such relief.
Ortiz-Vite previously received protection under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, commonly known as DACA, before that status expired in May 2019.
He was deported in 2020 following an arrest involving impaired driving and later returned to the United States without authorization. Public records have not established the precise date of that return.
The lawsuit will now move through the federal court’s screening process, where a judge will determine whether any of its claims can proceed. Trump and Cheung had not filed a publicly reported response during the case’s earliest docket activity, and no finding of liability had been issued.
For Garcia’s family and the Grand Rapids community, the filing reopens attention around a case whose central fact remains unchanged: a 25-year-old woman lost her life, and the man who admitted killing her is serving a lengthy prison sentence.
If you like what you just read, then subscribe to our newsletter and follow us on social media.
