Judge Considers Contempt Proceedings Against Trump Administration in Venezuelan Deportations Case
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg indicated that the administration may have acted in bad faith and failed to adhere to his ruling.
WASHINGTON—During a hearing on April 3, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg appeared inclined to determine that there was probable cause suggesting President Donald Trump’s administration was in contempt of court for violating his order that banned the deportation of suspected Venezuelan gang members pursuant to the Alien Enemies Act.
The Trump administration has asserted that it did not contravene two of Boasberg’s directives, which forbade deportations of illegal immigrants under that specific law while permitting expulsions under alternative legal grounds.
In the April 3 session, Boasberg expressed skepticism as he questioned Department of Justice (DOJ) Attorney Drew Ensign regarding his awareness of deportations involving suspected and confirmed foreign gang members on March 15. He remarked to Ensign that it appeared the administration may not have complied with his instructions and acted in “bad faith.”
As their dialogue drew to a close, Boasberg mentioned that he believed he could establish probable cause, potentially without the related information the administration contended was shielded by the state secrets privilege. Both Ensign and American Civil Liberties Union attorney Lee Gelernt, representing the Venezuelan plaintiffs in the case against Trump, responded to Boasberg’s inquiries regarding the most effective course of action should he find probable cause.
A decision is anticipated next week, when the court will consider whether Boasberg should implement a more stringent block—known as a preliminary injunction—against the administration’s operations. It remains unclear how Boasberg might address possible contempt; he inquired about the administration submitting declarations or whether the court might hold a hearing on the matter.
This hearing is part of ongoing tense interactions between the Trump administration and a federal judge overseeing numerous cases against the government. Trump is currently seeking intervention from the Supreme Court to suspend Boasberg’s orders after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed a similar appeal from three judges.
Related Stories
The case—J.G.G., et al. v. Trump, et al.—raises questions regarding the boundaries of executive authority versus judicial power. Trump has called for Boasberg’s impeachment, asserting that the judge has overstepped on presidential powers.
In a subsequent hearing in March, Boasberg remarked from the bench that the language employed in the case was “disrespectful” and “intemperate.” He once advised Ensign to ensure that his DOJ team understood a lesson he taught his clerks about their reputation and credibility being their most prized assets.
On March 15, the Trump administration expelled over 250 Venezuelan nationals alleged to be members of either the Tren de Aragua gang or the MS-13 gang, both classified by the U.S. as terrorist organizations. On the same day, Boasberg mandated that the deportation flights cease after several anonymous Venezuelans sought an emergency injunction to stop their deportation. Officials have stated that the flights had already departed when the judge issued his formal order.
During the April 3 hearing, Boasberg seemingly addressed rumors that his assignment to the deportation case was not random. He noted that he had been alerted around 7 a.m. ET on March 15 and implied that his availability to consider the plaintiffs’ anonymous filing facilitated their obtaining relief. He indicated that the case was given to him only after he was made aware of it.
Jacob Burg contributed to this report.
