Judge Boasberg Must Stop "Criminal Contempt" Proceedings Against the Department of Justice Due to Lack of Jurisdiction
Our favorite jurist has just been overruled by a higher court on yet another issue relating to the attempts to deport Mr. Abrego-Garcia. As discussed in prior posts, such as this one, Judge Boasberg has repeatedly attempted to exercise his jurisdiction over the details of enforcement of immigration law, from holding (wrongly) that the United States government should be enjoined from using the Alien Enemies Act to attempting to direct the government planes already in the air (again wrongly). Key to his errors is the idea (again, which is very, very wrong) that the equitable jurisdiction of his trial Article III court is virtually unlimited.
Yesterday the Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia, a "circuit court" that sits just below the Supreme Court, issued another judicial opinion designed to rein in Judge Boasberg. Following his Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs) to the effect that Mr. Kilmar Abrego-Garcia be returned to the United States even though the plane carrying him had already left the United States, Mr. Boasberg became incensed that Mr. Abrego-Garcia's plane did not turn around but instead landed and this gentlemen was then sent to his home country of El Salvador and not immediately returned to our fair land. He therefore brought criminal contempt proceedings against attorneys in the Department of Justice, apparently because he was powerless to further harass the President of the United States himself, and instead decided to bully those with less power, including attorneys in his courtroom.
But no longer. The Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia made it very clear Judge Boasberg must stop such contempt proceedings immediately. The two TRO's at issue barred removal of Mr. Abrego-Garcia but it was not clear is this included prevention of removal from the United States (he was, of course, already in the air and outside of our country) or also precluded handing him over to another country. The latter had not yet occurred when either TRO was issued. Of course, a judge has no jurisdiction to begin criminal contempt proceeding unless the TRO has been "clear and reasonably specific" in what actions are prohibited. But here there was no jurisdiction to punish the conduct of the DOJ lawyers because, inter alia, the Supreme Court has since vacated Judge Boasberg's TROs:
Indeed, as concurring Justice Roa explained, Judge Boasberg's "abuse of the contempt power is especially egregious" because here there are "separation of power[s] overtones" as the Judicial Branch attempts to change the policy of the Executive Branch and hold a cabinet-level officer and her subordinates in contempt:
The full text of the opinion may be found here:
https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2025/08/25-5124-2129262.pdf
