A dramatic legal battle escalated Friday as a federal appeals court intervened to temporarily halt contempt hearings ordered by Judge James Boasberg. The hearings, stemming from a dispute over deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, were set to begin next week and promised a contentious showdown.
Earlier in the day, Judge Boasberg signaled unwavering resolve, dismissing the government’s request for reconsideration and issuing a stark warning. He indicated a willingness to bypass attorney-client privilege, a move that would significantly raise the stakes and potentially expose sensitive communications.
The DC Circuit Court of Appeals responded swiftly, a three-judge panel issuing an administrative stay. Judges Rao and Walker, both Trump appointees, granted the stay, effectively pausing Boasberg’s proceedings pending further review by the court.
The decision wasn’t unanimous. Judge Childs, a Biden appointee, dissented, indicating she would have allowed the contempt hearings to proceed. This split highlights the deep divisions surrounding the case and its implications.
The conflict centers on Judge Boasberg’s revived criminal contempt inquiry targeting former President Trump regarding the deportation of individuals under the Alien Enemies Act. This action followed revelations that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem authorized deportation flights in March, directly defying Boasberg’s earlier emergency order.
While Judge Boasberg deemed it “premature” to recommend criminal prosecution for Secretary Noem, he demanded the testimony of the two highest-ranking Justice Department lawyers involved in the deportations. Their appearance was scheduled for next week, a key component of the now-paused hearings.
The initial spark ignited in March when Judge Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order, halting the Trump administration’s efforts to deport thousands of Venezuelan nationals suspected of ties to the notorious Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang, invoking the Alien Enemies Act.
Boasberg expressed outrage over the potential release of dangerous individuals, stating his concern that officials were prepared to allow some of the world’s most violent criminals – including alleged killers and rapists – to remain free. He believed the administration knowingly disregarded his directive to return planes carrying these individuals to the United States.
The judge found probable cause to believe the Trump administration acted in criminal contempt of court, deliberately defying his order. This determination stemmed from a detailed 46-page opinion outlining what Boasberg characterized as a “willful defiance” of the judicial process.
The core of the dispute lies in the administration’s decision to proceed with the deportations despite the restraining order, a move Judge Boasberg contends constitutes a direct challenge to the authority of the court and the rule of law.
