Judge Broadens Contempt Inquiry, Citing Kristi Noem’s Lack of Response on Deportations
A federal judge has expanded his contempt inquiry into the actions of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem regarding migrant deportations. US District Judge James Boasberg ordered a senior attorney from the Justice Department (DOJ) to testify under oath about critical decisions made by the administration.
Details of the Contempt Inquiry
The inquiry involves deportations that took place in mid-March, where migrants were sent to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act. This occurred despite a court order that mandated the return of flights carrying the migrants while a legal challenge was ongoing against the use of this act by former President Donald Trump’s administration.
Testimonies Ordered
- Drew Ensign: A top DOJ attorney involved in immigration matters, ordered to testify next week about the deportation decisions.
- Erez Reuveni: A former DOJ lawyer who filed a whistleblower complaint and alleged that a top official indicated intentions to ignore court orders.
Judge Boasberg highlighted that the testimonies are necessary due to Noem’s insufficient information in a sworn statement submitted to the court last week. The judge noted, “As this declaration does not provide enough information for the Court to determine whether her decision was a willful violation of the Court’s Order, the Court cannot at this juncture find probable cause that her actions constituted criminal contempt.”
The Context of Deportations
The deportation flights continued despite Boasberg’s prior orders. The migrants were held in a notorious prison in El Salvador for an extended period, eventually being released as part of a prisoner swap with Venezuela. This incident adds complexity to the administration’s historically aggressive deportation policies.
Recent Developments
In April, Judge Boasberg established that “probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt.” However, proceedings were hampered by the DC US Circuit Court of Appeals before they were recently resumed. Boasberg is eager to pursue the inquiry, stating, “I certainly intend to find out what happened on that day.”
Reactions From Advocacy Groups
Lee Gelernt, an attorney from the American Civil Liberties Union, expressed concerns over the administration’s actions. He stated, “The stakes could not be higher if high-level officials of the United States chose to thumb their nose at a federal court.” He emphasized the gravity of sending individuals to a precarious situation without due process.
This ongoing inquiry reflects significant implications for accountability within the U.S. government and adherence to judicial rulings regarding immigration policies. Judge Boasberg’s call for direct testimony seeks clarity in a highly contentious and consequential legal matter. The outcome may set important precedents regarding judicial authority versus administrative actions.
