We'll mark this one down as "no big surprise," but Judge James Boasberg, the presiding judge for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, has now issued an opinion finding probable cause the Trump administration's actions in regard to the Alien Enemies Act (AEA)/Tren de Aragua (TdA) case constitute contempt.  

JUST IN: Judge Boasberg finds probable cause to hold administration in contempt of court for defying his order to turn around planes, demands new details in order for officials to “purge” their contempt. Details TK pic.twitter.com/V5RQ59ugJg

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) April 16, 2025

To jog memories (since there is so much ongoing litigation regarding the administration), this is the case involving the flights of purported TdA gang members to El Salvador on March 15, 2025. Emergency hearings held that day (a Saturday) resulted in Boasberg issuing a temporary restraining order (TRO) and ultimately extending it to a putative class that included all TdA members subject to the AEA proclamation issued by President Trump. 

READ MORE: Trump Appeals Rogue Judge's Decision Demanding Deported Terrorists Be Brought Back to the United States

Judge Threatens to Hold Trump DOJ in Contempt in Latest Order on Deportation Flights

Lots of legal wrangling has ensued since, including a trip to the Supreme Court, which, just last Monday, handed the Trump administration a win with a determination that Boasberg didn't have proper jurisdiction over the case. His orders were vacated, and the five named plaintiffs in that suit have since filed habeas actions in the jurisdictions where they are being held. 

Some may have assumed that since the Supreme Court ruled he did not have jurisdiction over the case, that would moot any potential issue as to contempt. Not so, says Boasberg in his 46-page opinion, which may be viewed in full below. 

One might nonetheless ask how this inquiry into compliance is able to proceed at all given that the Supreme Court vacated the TRO after the events in question. That Court’s later determination that the TRO suffered from a legal defect, however, does not excuse the Government’s violation. Instead, it is a foundational legal precept that every judicial order “must be obeyed” — no matter how “erroneous” it “may be” — until a court reverses it. Walker v. City of Birmingham, 388 U.S. 307, 314 (1967). If a party chooses to disobey the order — rather than wait for it to be reversed through the judicial process — such disobedience is punishable as contempt, notwithstanding any later-revealed deficiencies in the order. See id. at 314, 320. That foundational “rule of law” answers not just how this compliance inquiry can proceed, but why it must. See id. at 320. The rule “reflects a belief that in the fair administration of justice no man can be judge in his own case,” no matter how “exalted his station” or “righteous his motives.”Id. at 320–21.

The Constitution does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders — especially by officials of a coordinate branch who have sworn an oath to uphold it. To permit such officials to freely “annul the judgments of the courts of the United States” would not just “destroy the rights acquired under those judgments”; it would make “a solemn mockery” of “the constitution itself.” United States v. Peters, 9 U.S. (5 Cranch) 115, 136 (1809) (Marshall, C.J.). “So fatal a result must be deprecated by all.” Id.

So, what is the practical effect of Boasberg's finding? Well, he's kind enough to lay that out in the opinion, beginning on page 43, and in the accompanying order. The government has until April 23, 2025, to "purge their contempt" 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." Helpfully, Boasberg adds that, "the Government would not need to release any of those individuals, nor would it need to transport them back to the homeland. The Court will also give Defendants an opportunity to propose other methods of coming into compliance, which the Court will evaluate."

Otherwise, they must by that date identify the individual(s) "who, with knowledge of the Court’s classwide Temporary Restraining Order, made the decision not to halt the transfer of class members out of U.S. custody on March 15 and 16, 2025."

So, the next move is up to the administration. My hunch is that they'll attempt to appeal the order (and stay it pending appeal). And my hope is that the Supreme Court has eaten its Wheaties, because it's got its work cut out for it with this one. 

gov.uscourts.dcd.278436.81.0_2 by Susie Moore on Scribd

Editor's Note: Radical leftist judges are doing everything they can to hamstring President Trump's agenda to make America great again.

Help us hold these corrupt judges accountable for their unconstitutional rulings. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.