DOJ Asks Federal Court To Permit Deportations To El Salvador Despite Boasberg Order
Administration attorneys have petitioned a federal appeals court to block contempt proceedings initiated by a lower court, arguing that Chief District Judge James Boasberg’s ongoing involvement in last month’s deportations to El Salvador has sparked a “needless constitutional confrontation.”
According to the Washington Times, Justice Department lawyer Drew Ensign contended that Boasberg is overstepping his authority and encroaching on the president’s control over foreign policy by compelling the government to return hundreds of Venezuelan gang suspects under threat of criminal prosecution.
Ensign further maintained that a contempt charge would be inappropriate, noting that Boasberg’s original directive was so ambiguous that the parties are still debating its interpretation more than a month later.
“The district court’s criminal contempt order invites needless constitutional confrontation,” Ensign emphasized in a brief submitted Friday to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
The dispute stems from the first legal challenge tied to President Donald Trump’s recent use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged Tren de Aragua gang members to El Salvador, where U.S. resources are being used to detain them.
In a move described as incredulous, Boasberg commanded planes transporting the migrants to reverse course and halted any flights that had not yet departed.
By the time Boasberg issued his order, two flights had already exited U.S. airspace and continued their journeys. A third flight also took off, with officials asserting that those deportations were conducted under standard immigration laws rather than the 1798 Alien Enemies Act central to the lawsuit.
Ensign pointed out that there was confusion over whether Boasberg’s instructions applied to the physical act of removing individuals from U.S. soil or to their complete legal removal from U.S. custody.
“Criminal contempt proceedings cannot be predicated on an order so unclear that, weeks later, parties and the court are parsing a hearing transcript to divine its true meaning — and where the executive branch, which is constitutionally charged with the prosecutorial power, believes that no crime was committed at all,” Ensign added, as reported by the Times.
Although the Supreme Court has already stripped Boasberg of jurisdiction in this matter, the judge continues to press forward, asserting that he must probe what transpired while he still had authority.
Boasberg has stated he has found “probable cause” to hold a government official in contempt.
He has asked the administration to suggest remedies to “purge” the contempt, including a proposal to allow deportees a chance to challenge their removals — although Boasberg indicated he is open to other solutions as well.
If no agreement is achieved, he warned he would proceed with contempt charges. Should the Justice Department refuse to prosecute, Boasberg vowed to appoint a special prosecutor, according to the Times.
For now, the D.C. appeals court has suspended Boasberg’s case while it considers the government's appeal.
Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the Venezuelan plaintiffs opposing their deportations, has encouraged the appeals court to refrain from intervening at this stage, arguing that a formal contempt trial has yet to begin, the Times reported.
Earlier this week, Attorney General Pam Bondi expressed strong disapproval of Boasberg, particularly after he was incredulously “assigned” another Trump-related case involving the controversial Signal group. Bondi claimed he “cannot be objective,” and insisted that “many judges need to be removed.”
Bondi argued that Boasberg’s handling of the new case — involving Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vice President Vance, and other officials discussing a potential military action against Houthi rebels in Yemen — was a “wild coincidence against Donald Trump and our administration.”
“He shouldn’t be on any of these cases. He cannot be objective. He’s made that crystal clear,” Bondi asserted.
Boasberg is now presiding over four separate lawsuits involving the Trump administration, each one reportedly assigned to him at random.