Tag: judge james boasberg
Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg

Judge Threatens White House With Contempt Over Deportation Order

Citing a “willful disregard,” Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg has found probable cause that the Trump administration could be held in criminal contempt of court after officials defied his order to not remove Venezuelan migrants from the country based on a centuries-old wartime law.

Boasberg, first appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush, on Wednesday “said he would launch proceedings to determine whether to hold Trump administration officials in criminal contempt,” The Washington Post reported.

Pointing to the “broader showdown between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary,” the Post reported that Boasberg “[said] the Trump administration’s actions on March 15, as the removal flights proceeded despite his order to the contrary, ‘demonstrate a willful disregard … sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt.'”

The judge wrote: “The Court does not reach such conclusion lightly or hastily; indeed, it has given Defendants ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions. None of their responses has been satisfactory.”

But Boasberg also offered the administration some options: essentially, file “a declaration explaining the steps they have taken and will take to do so,” or, file “declaration(s) identifying the individual(s) who, with knowledge of the Court’s classwide Temporary Restraining Order, made the decision not to halt the transfer of class members out of U.S. custody on March 15 and 16, 2025.”

Attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick explains that Boasberg ordered “them either to fix their mistake, or identify who made those decisions (presumably for further sanctions).”

“The Constitution,” Boasberg also wrote, citing previous rulings, “does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders — especially by officials of a coordinate branch who have sworn an oath to uphold it. To permit such officials to freely ‘annul the judgments of the courts of the United States’ would not just ‘destroy the rights acquired under those judgments’; it would make ‘a solemn mockery’ of ‘the constitution itself.’

Watch CNN’s report below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Experts Warn: Autocrat Trump 'Now Thinks He's The Law'

Experts Warn: Autocrat Trump 'Now Thinks He's The Law'

Several top legal experts are now sounding the alarm over the implications of President Donald Trump testing the extent of the federal judiciary's enforcement power.

NBC News reported Monday that Trump's ongoing standoff with the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia over two recent deportation flights has some in the legal community worried about the health of the United States' system of checks and balances. Kimberly Wehle, who is a law professor at the University of Baltimore, told the network that Americans are now "watching the accumulation of power in one person, which is antithetical to our constitutional democracy."

"He now is the law,” Wehle said. “He decides what’s legal and not legal. He decides winners and losers, and it’s arbitrary.”

Over the weekend, Judge James Boasberg — who was appointed by former President Barack Obama — ruled that Trump did not have the authority under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelan immigrants who the administration alleges are members of a violent gang. Boasberg pointed out that the law the administration invoked had only been used three times in U.S. history, and only against foreign governments. His ruling ordered that the deportation flights be turned back around as alleged gang members were not on the same legal footing as a foreign government.

Boasberg's ruling enraged both Trump and his supporters, with some MAGA-aligned voices — including Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) — calling on Boasberg to be impeached. One unnamed Trump advisor told NBC that they viewed Boasberg as an "activist" judge who was blocking "the mandate we were given."

According to Ilya Somin, who is a law professor at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School, the administration's position in the two deportation flights "seems like more explicit defiance" than previous actions, like refusing to disburse funds already appropriated by Congress.

“If the executive can defy court orders whenever they feel like it, they are essentially not constrained by the Constitution and the laws anymore,” he added. “If they defy court orders and get away with it, they can basically do things that are illegal and there would be no easy way of stopping them."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World