Politics
JUST IN: Judge Boasberg Rages Over Deported Gangmember, Finds Trump Officials In Contempt
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg has issued a scathing 46-page ruling finding members of President Trump’s administration in criminal contempt—despite the Supreme Court vacating the very orders Boasberg claims were defied.
The decision stems from a March 15 deportation operation under Trump’s new directive invoking the Alien Enemies Act, which targeted alleged members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang recently designated a terrorist organization. Federal officials removed dozens of detainees to El Salvador that night, including two flights that departed U.S. airspace before Boasberg’s written order was filed, raising serious questions about his legal basis for the contempt ruling.
“As this Opinion will detail, the Court ultimately determines that the Government’s actions on that day demonstrate a willful disregard for its Order, sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt,” Boasberg wrote.
“If a party chooses to disobey the order — rather than wait for it to be reversed through the judicial process — such disobedience is punishable as contempt, notwithstanding any later-revealed deficiencies in the order.”
His central argument hinges on an oral command he gave during a Saturday evening hearing, in which he allegedly instructed DOJ counsel to “inform your clients” that deported individuals needed to be returned to the U.S.—even if their planes had already taken off. That command was not included in the written order issued later, which simply barred the “removal” of individuals under the proclamation for 14 days.
Chief Judge James E. Boasberg
Despite that omission, Boasberg insists the administration “willfully” disregarded the Court’s authority by allowing the flights to continue. “The Constitution does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders—especially by officials of a coordinate branch,” he wrote, accusing officials of making a “mockery” of the judiciary.
But the Supreme Court has already weighed in—vacating both of Boasberg’s restraining orders earlier this month and ruling that the D.C. court lacked proper venue to hear the case in the first place. In other words, the very basis for Boasberg’s contempt claim no longer exists.
Even more damning is that Boasberg directly contradicted his own statements from an April 3 hearing, where he acknowledged how the case reached him via random assignment. Some argue Boasberg has been laying the groundwork for this ruling since March 15, setting what they describe as a contempt “trap” designed to manufacture the narrative that Trump officials disobeyed court orders.
The judge himself admits that the planes left U.S. airspace before his oral instructions—the same instructions not included in any written court order—were issued. Nonetheless, he contends that because his intent was verbally communicated, the government was obligated to comply or face punishment.
“Defendants provide no convincing reason to avoid the conclusion that appears obvious… that they deliberately flouted this Court’s written Order and, separately, its oral command that explicitly delineated what compliance entailed,” Boasberg wrote.
Boasberg appears undeterred. In the final pages of the opinion, he opens the door to criminal prosecution, warning that if the officials do not “purge” the contempt by reversing the deportations—a move likely impossible—he will move forward with identifying specific individuals for referral.
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court will find probable cause that Defendants’ actions constitute contempt. It will provide them an opportunity to purge such contempt. If they opt not to do so, the Court will proceed to identify the contemnor(s) and refer the matter for prosecution,” the judge finished.
