US President Donald Trump speaks to the media with the media during a guided tour of John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts before heading a board meeting in Washington on March 17, 2025.
Chip Somodevilla | Getty pictures
The Ministry of Justice asked a federal court in Washington, DC, on Monday to replace the judge of the district court who monitored a case that questioned the deportations of the Trump government of hundreds of alleged members of the Venezuelan gangs according to the law on Alien Ensemies in the war.
The application, in which the alleged “inappropriate exercise of jurisdiction” by Chief James Boasberg quoted, came when Boasberg carried out a hearing, in which he pressed a first-class DOJ lawyer about the circumstances of the deportations carried out at the weekend.
The DOJ last Monday, Boasberg, asked for no success to cancel this hearing.
Boasberg had told the Doj in an oral order on Saturday that he was supposed to order the return of deportees who had still reached flights in the air that came in the USA.
In a court registration, the DOJ claimed that “an oral guideline in a guideline could not be enforced” and explained that the written order of Boasberg was granted the further deportation flights of Venezolans hours later.
The deputy deputy attorney of General Abhishek Kambli said Boasberg on Monday that he was not free to talk about details of the controversial deportation flights in a public environment before the US district court in Washington.
At the same hearing, a lawyer of five Venezuelan men who questioned their feared deportations said to Boasberg that he wanted to be careful with regard to his language, but said: “A lot of constitutional crisis has been discussed in the past few weeks.”
“I think we come very close,” said, who argues that two deportation flights to Boasberg's oral order from the United States started.
It seemed to refer to Kambli's refusal to answer questions from the judge about the flights, and on the argument of the Trump government that the deportations according to the law on Alien Enemies were not subject to the judicial order after the flights left us.
“It doesn't matter whether they are in the US air -and -out space,” said Boasberg during the hearing on Monday.
Read more CNBC policy reporting
Kambline replied and said: “If the planes are in the sky and it is a question of national security” before the judge was cut off, he asked why the planes were not turned over.
Boasberg suggested that the position of the Doj “We don't care, we will do what we want.”
Boasberg asked whether President Donald Trump had “additional” powers when an airplane crosses international water.
“I think my righteous forces are pretty clear” and do not end on the edge of the continent, said Boasberg.
He also called the DOJ's argument that the aircraft could not be turned over when his command “a damn stretch” was granted.
The judge said he would spend a written order later, in which the answers he wanted until noon Tuesday “,” because my oral orders seem to be of great importance. ”
In this order, Boasberg said: “The government may submit an announcement that can be partially sealed if necessary: 1) A sworn explanation that nobody will end up in the United States on a flight after 7.25 a.m. on March 15, 2025.
“If the government occupies the position that it will not provide this information to the court under any circumstances, it must support this position, including the closure matters, if necessary, if necessary” if necessary “
The order said.
In its letter on Monday, the DOJ to the Court of Appeal of the Court of Court for the District of Columbia rejected an objection to Boasberg's chair and said that he had a public hearing in order to deal with “operating data on flights, in which aliens, which were connected to a proven foreign terrorist organization, were removed.
“This development escalates the operations of the inappropriate exercise of the district court of
The jurisdiction and the risks that the district court can force the government to disclose sensitive national security and surgical security concerns or to be exposed to significant punishments by the court, ”wrote the deputy attorney lawyer Drew Ensign to the Court of Appeal.
“This case should also assign this case to another district judge in view of the extremely unusual and improper procedures – e.g. certification of a collective action in which members of a proven foreign terrorist organization were used in less than 18 hours without the government and without briefing the government -, wrote.
The Court of Appeal has not yet decided on Ensign's application.
Comments are closed.