James Boasberg

“does not dispute that after this written TRO issued, it temporarily landed two planeloads of class members in Honduras, flew them to El Salvador, deplaned them there, and then — critically — transferred them from U.S. to Salvadoran custody,”

James Boasberg · said 2025-04-16 · reported 2025-07-11

Chief Judge Boasberg noted undisputed facts regarding the transfer of class members after the TRO was issued.

“the Court will proceed to identify the individual(s) responsible for the contumacious conduct by determining whose ‘specific act or omission’ caused the noncompliance.”

James Boasberg · said 2025-04-16 · reported 2025-07-11

Chief Judge Boasberg detailed the next steps if the administration did not purge its contempt.

“The Court ultimately determines that the Government’s actions on that day [Mar. 15] demonstrate a willful disregard for its Order, sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt,”

James Boasberg · said 2025-04-16 · reported 2025-07-11

Chief Judge Boasberg ruled that probable cause existed to find the government in criminal contempt.

“willfully disobeyed a binding judicial decree.”

James Boasberg · said date not stated · reported 2025-07-11

Chief Judge Boasberg held that administration officials may have engaged in criminal contempt regarding the transfer of Venezuelan detainees.

“First, before initiating any criminal-contempt proceedings, courts typically allow the contumacious party an opportunity to purge its contempt,”

James Boasberg · said 2025-04-16 · reported 2025-07-11

Chief Judge Boasberg outlined standard procedures before initiating criminal-contempt proceedings.

“The most obvious way for Defendants to do so here is by asserting custody of the individuals who were removed in violation of the Court’s classwide TRO so that they might avail themselves of their right to challenge their removability through a habeas proceeding.”

James Boasberg · said 2025-04-16 · reported 2025-07-11

Chief Judge Boasberg described how the defendants could purge their contempt.

“The Court does not reach such conclusion lightly or hastily; indeed, it has given Defendants ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions. None of their responses has been satisfactory.”

James Boasberg · said 2025-04-16 · reported 2025-07-11

Chief Judge Boasberg explained that the court gave defendants ample opportunity to explain their actions.