Category: Law & Policy Updates
Breaking: I have obtained the Justice Department’s Dec. 12 motion asking the D.C. Circuit to halt upcoming contempt hearings and to remove Judge James E. Boasberg from a high stakes deportation case. The filing accuses the judge of retaliation and harassment, and says his conduct has crossed a line. This fight is now a direct test of separation of powers, judicial independence, and due process in immigration enforcement. ⚖️
What happened today
The Justice Department is asking the appeals court to step in now. It wants the court to pause contempt proceedings Judge Boasberg plans to hold. It also wants him taken off the case. The motion argues there is an appearance he cannot be impartial in disputes over deportations of Venezuelan nationals under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act.
Here is what DOJ seeks at this moment:
- A stay that blocks further contempt hearings
- An order disqualifying Judge Boasberg and reassigning the case
The stakes are clear. If granted, the move would sideline a sitting judge in an active clash with the executive branch.
How we got here
In March 2025, Judge Boasberg issued a restraining order. He limited the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan nationals without court review. Despite that order, flights moved forward. He then found probable cause for criminal contempt based on noncompliance with his directive.
In July, DOJ filed a formal misconduct complaint against him. It cited remarks he allegedly made about potential defiance of court rulings. The department asked for an investigation, a reprimand, and his removal from the case while that inquiry proceeds.
In August, the D.C. Circuit stepped in. The court ruled that Judge Boasberg’s criminal contempt push exceeded his authority. That decision sharply narrowed what he could do next in contempt proceedings.
Now, with new hearings on the calendar, DOJ is moving to stop them and to disqualify the judge.
[IMAGE_1]
The legal stakes
This fight is a live test of checks and balances. District judges can enforce their orders through contempt. The executive branch controls prosecutions and removal operations. The D.C. Circuit is now the referee between them.
The earlier appeals ruling trimmed the court’s contempt power in this case. It signaled that contempt cannot become a backdoor way to direct executive policy. Today’s motion goes further. DOJ is asking the appeals court to police the judge’s conduct and to take him off the matter.
Federal recusal law requires a judge to step aside when impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The D.C. Circuit will decide if that standard is met here.
If the court grants a stay, contempt hearings stop. If it orders reassignment, a new judge will pick up the case file. If it denies relief, Judge Boasberg’s hearings move forward under the limits already set by the August decision.
Immigration policy and citizen rights
The Alien Enemies Act is an old wartime statute. Its use here to deport Venezuelan nationals triggered sharp due process concerns. Judge Boasberg’s orders sought to maintain court oversight and access to a legal process before removal. The executive argues it must move quickly to protect public safety and carry out removal priorities.
Real people sit at the center of this dispute. Noncitizens facing removal have rights to fair process under the Constitution. Citizens have an interest in a system where court orders are obeyed, and where judges act within clear bounds. The outcome will set guidance on when courts can halt deportations that rely on rarely used statutes, and how far a judge can go to enforce compliance.
If you or a family member received a removal notice tied to this policy, keep all paperwork, contact counsel, and attend every check in. Court orders can protect you only if you are reachable and present.
[IMAGE_2]
What to watch next
- A fast order from the D.C. Circuit on the stay request
- A decision on removing Judge Boasberg or keeping him on
- Any action on the pending misconduct complaint
- How DHS adjusts deportation plans if hearings pause
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the Alien Enemies Act?
A: It is a 1798 law that lets the government restrain or remove nationals of hostile foreign powers during times of conflict. Its modern use is rare, which is why court oversight here is so intense.
Q: What is contempt of court in this context?
A: Contempt is a tool to enforce court orders. Judge Boasberg found probable cause that his order was ignored after flights proceeded. The appeals court has limited how he can pursue criminal contempt.
Q: Can DOJ force a judge off a case?
A: DOJ can ask the appeals court to reassign a case. The court grants that only in unusual situations, usually to protect the appearance of fairness.
Q: What happens to deportation flights now?
A: If the D.C. Circuit grants a stay, hearings stop and flights tied to the disputed policy could pause. If it denies a stay, hearings go on under the August limits.
Q: Does this affect citizens’ rights?
A: Citizens are not subject to the Alien Enemies Act. But everyone depends on clear limits between branches, and on courts that can enforce orders without overreach.
Conclusion
This is a rare constitutional collision, not a routine docket fight. The D.C. Circuit now holds the pen on judicial independence, executive power, and the due process rights at stake in deportations. I will continue to report every development as it lands. This decision will echo far beyond one courtroom, shaping how the branches check each other, and how fast a removal policy can move.
