Federal Appeals Court Dismisses DOJ Complaint Against Judge in Trump-Era Deportation Dispute
A federal appeals court judge has formally dismissed a judicial misconduct complaint brought by the U.S. Justice Department against Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who previously clashed with the Trump administration over its efforts to deport several Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador. The decision marks a significant development in a contentious legal and political battle that unfolded during the previous presidential administration.
Background of the Judicial Complaint
In July, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi took the unusual step of publicly announcing the complaint against Judge Boasberg, who serves in Washington, D.C. The Justice Department alleged that Boasberg made improper comments about then-President Donald Trump during a March meeting of the Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary's primary policymaking body. The complaint specifically focused on remarks attributed to Boasberg by the conservative media outlet The Federalist, which reported that the judge expressed concerns to Chief Supreme Court Justice John Roberts and other attendees about the administration potentially disregarding court rulings and triggering "a constitutional crisis."
The Underlying Deportation Case
The controversy stems from Judge Boasberg's handling of litigation involving Venezuelan nationals who challenged their removal from the United States under the Alien Enemies Act. In April, Boasberg concluded that the Trump administration appeared to have acted "in bad faith" when it hastily organized three deportation flights on March 15, coinciding with emergency court proceedings he was conducting to assess the legality of the deportation effort. Days after Boasberg indicated he might initiate disciplinary proceedings against Justice Department lawyers for their conduct in the Venezuelans' lawsuit, Bondi announced the judicial misconduct complaint against him.
Appeals Court's Rationale for Dismissal
Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a newly-released order dated December 19, determined that the Justice Department's complaint lacked merit. Judge Sutton noted that the DOJ failed to provide sufficient proof that Boasberg actually made the statements in question. More importantly, Sutton ruled that even if such comments were uttered, they would not violate judicial ethics rules when expressed during the Judicial Conference's closed-door meeting.
"In these settings, a judge's expression of anxiety about executive-branch compliance with judicial orders, whether rightly feared or not, is not so far afield from customary topics at these meetings—judicial independence, judicial security, and inter-branch relations—as to violate the Codes of Judicial Conduct," Sutton wrote in his decision.
Procedural Handling and Reactions
Due to potential conflicts among judges in Washington, D.C., Chief Justice Roberts transferred the complaint to the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit's Judicial Council for review. The Justice Department has not responded to requests for comment following the dismissal. Judge Boasberg, who was appointed by former Democratic President Barack Obama, has declined to comment on the matter.
This dismissal represents a notable judicial rebuke of the Justice Department's attempt to sanction a federal judge over comments made during internal judicial discussions about executive branch compliance with court orders.
