Trump Administration Challenges Court’s Contempt Inquiry in Migrant Deportation Case

Lawyers for the Trump administration have filed motions to halt a renewed contempt inquiry led by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, arguing the court is overstepping its authority by scheduling testimony from current and former Justice Department officials next week.

In filings submitted earlier this week, Justice Department lawyers claimed the inquiry “exceeds its authority and is now intruding on the prerogatives of a co-equal branch.” They further argued that “criminal contempt is a criminal offense, and the investigation and prosecution of crimes is core executive power reserved to the Executive Branch.”

The legal dispute stems from a March incident in which the Trump administration allegedly defied Boasberg’s temporary restraining order that sought to block the use of the 18th century Alien Enemies Act to deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador.

Judge Boasberg has scheduled testimony from Drew Ensign, the Justice Department’s deputy assistant attorney general, who is set to appear in court on Monday for questioning and cross-examination from lawyers representing the deported Venezuelan migrants. The following day, former Justice Department lawyer Erez Reuveni is scheduled to testify. Reuveni has publicly accused the administration of ignoring court orders, including in this case.

“The Court thus believes that it is necessary to hear witness testimony to better understand the basis of the decision to transfer the deportees out of United States custody in the context of the hearing on March 15, 2025,” Boasberg wrote in his scheduling order.

The administration is pushing back aggressively, requesting that the court either cancel the scheduled witness examinations entirely or allow officials to block testimony based on “executive privilege.” They have also asked to limit the scope of testimony and prevent the plaintiffs from participating in the questioning if the court proceeds with the hearings.

“If the Court does proceed with testimony, it should grant a protective order with respect to privileged information or provide Defendants with an opportunity to seek appellate relief in advance of any testimony,” administration lawyers argued.

Last month, DOJ officials identified Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem as the official who authorized the transfer of Venezuelan migrants after being briefed on Boasberg’s emergency order by lawyers from both the Justice Department and DHS. In her own declaration, Noem stated she made the decision based on legal advice from these government attorneys.

The renewed inquiry follows action by the D.C. Circuit Court, which vacated an earlier ruling and returned the matter to Boasberg’s court. The judge said earlier this week it would be “premature” to refer anyone for prosecution under the contempt probe and declined to immediately compel testimony from Secretary Noem at this stage.

The case highlights ongoing tensions between the Trump administration and Judge Boasberg, who serves as chief judge for the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. Former President Trump has repeatedly criticized Boasberg as an “activist judge” for his role in the Alien Enemies Act case and the resulting inquiry.

Boasberg appears determined to proceed despite the criticism. “This has been sitting for a long time,” he stated late last month, “and I believe justice requires me to move promptly on this.” He added that the government “can assist me to whatever degree it wishes.”

The conflict represents a significant test of judicial authority versus executive power, particularly regarding immigration enforcement actions. The outcome may establish important precedent for how courts can enforce their orders against federal agencies when controversial deportation policies are involved.