Full story
Appeals Court Halts Contempt Probe
A divided federal appeals court ordered Judge Boasberg to end his criminal contempt inquiry into Trump officials.
“The district court has launched an intrusive criminal contempt investigation into whether the government acted willfully when it transferred suspected Tren de Aragua members to Salvadoran custody. But the end of this investigation is a legal dead end”
The decision came almost exactly a year after Boasberg found probable cause to find the government in criminal contempt.
The D.C. Circuit's two-judge majority of Trump appointees ruled the contempt probe was a clear abuse of discretion.
The administration had identified then-DHS Secretary Kristi Noem as responsible for allowing the deportations to continue.
Judge Michelle Childs, a Biden appointee, dissented.
Legal Battle Over Deportations
The contempt proceedings stemmed from Boasberg's March 2025 order halting deportations of Venezuelan migrants.
Boasberg ordered the government to turn back planes already in the air, but the administration defied the order.
The Justice Department later identified Noem as the official responsible for allowing the deportations to continue.
The D.C. Circuit majority found the case raised separation of powers concerns.
The ruling came as Boasberg was preparing to hold a whistleblower hearing.
Dissent and Political Context
Judge Michelle Childs dissented, writing that contempt of court is done to preserve and enforce the law.
“Judge J. Michelle Childs dissented”
The ruling came amid a broader battle over Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act.
Boasberg had found probable cause to hold the administration in contempt, but the Supreme Court later voided his order.
The Justice Department argued Boasberg's directive was only delivered verbally.
The Trump administration faced criticism for defying a federal judge's order.
Whistleblower Hearing and Next Steps
Boasberg was preparing to hold a whistleblower hearing with Justice Department attorney Drew Ensign.
He had ordered Noem, Bove, and Blanche to disclose what conversations the administration had.
All declined to provide details.
The ruling pauses the contempt probe but does not resolve underlying legal questions.