Judge Says He May Find Trump Officials in Contempt of Court for Defying Orders

On Wednesday, United States District Judge James Boasberg issued an opinion finding that the Trump administration likely acted in contempt of court when they refused to abide by one of his rulings relating to the deportation of Venezuelan immigrants last month.

In his order, Boasberg noted that there was probable cause to suggest that the “willful disobedience” of his previous rulings amounted to contempt by members of the Trump White House, which could be viewed as a criminal action.

In March, Boasberg had ordered the temporary halting of deportations of Venezuelan immigrants the administration had planned to deport — and indeed, had already begun sending — to El Salvador. In an addendum oral order, Boasberg also said that the administration must turn around planes that were en route to that country.

The Trump administration refused to abide by that command, and in the weeks afterward gave competing rationales for why they didn’t, initially saying that the oral order meant they didn’t have to follow it, and later claiming they could ignore Boasberg because the flights were over international waters.

In his Wednesday order, Boasberg stated that “the Government’s actions on that day demonstrate a willful disregard” for what he had said should happen. He added:

The Constitution 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.

Boasberg ordered the administration to respond within one week before contempt hearings could begin. The judge also stated that hearings could be dismissed if the White House coordinated with El Salvador to have the people who were errantly flown there returned to the U.S.

“The most obvious way for Defendants to [avoid a contempt finding] is by asserting custody of the individuals who were removed in violation of the Court’s classwide [temporary restraining order] so that they might avail themselves of their right to challenge their removability through a habeas proceeding,” Boasberg said.

If the administration doesn’t file a response, Boasberg could then recommend prosecution against those he identifies as having been responsible for the defying of his orders.

Boasberg is not the only judge to consider possible contempt charges against Trump officials. In another case involving the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legal resident who the administration admits was mistakenly sent to El Salvador, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis suggested on Tuesday that she, too, could initiate the contempt of court process.

Xinis previously ruled that the White House had to “effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return to the U.S. Late last week, the Supreme Court affirmed that finding, but since that time the administration has failed to provide evidence that it’s doing so, Xinis said.

“I’ve gotten no real response, and no real legal justification for not answering,” she said this week.

In a written order following the Tuesday hearing, Xinis added that, if the pattern of refusal to provide evidence of their work continues, Abrego Garcia’s lawyers “are free to seek separate sanctions on an expedited basis.”