Attorney
General
Pam
Bondi
is
tryin’
it
with
Chief
Judge
James
Boasberg.
At
an
emergency
hearing
on
Saturday
regarding
Venezuelan
migrants
summarily
deported
to
a
slave
prison
in
El
Salvador
pursuant
to
the
Alien
Enemies
Act,
Judge
Boasberg
ordered
the
government
to
return
any
migrants
under
DHS
control,
including
those
already
on
airplanes.
“However
that’s
accomplished,
whether
turning
around
a
plane
or
not
embarking
anyone
on
the
plane
or
those
people
covered
by
this
on
the
plane,
I
leave
to
you,”
he
said
at
6:48
p.m.
“But
this
is
something
that
you
need
to
make
sure
is
complied
with
immediately.”
After
which
the
government
unloaded
at
least
two
planeloads
of
deportees,
and
Salvadoran
President
Nayib
Bukele
seemingly
joked
about
defying
the
court
in
a
tweet
that
was
reposted
by
multiple
Trump
administration
officials.
In
court,
the
DOJ
has
been
forced
to
pretend
that
it
is
not
in
open
contempt
of
a
federal
judge’s
order.
At
a
hearing
on
Monday,
Assistant
US
Attorney
Abhishek
Kambli
argued
variously
that
the
judge’s
oral
order
didn’t
count
until
it
was
memorialized
in
writing,
that
the
court
lost
jurisdiction
once
the
planes
departed
US
airspace,
and
that
he
could
neither
discuss
the
status
of
the
flights
nor
explain
on
what
legal
basis
he
was
refusing
to
do
so.
This
last
argument
seems
to
have
incensed
the
judge
most
of
all,
and
he
ordered
the
government
to
answer
several
questions
about
the
deportation
flights
by
Wednesday
at
noon,
or
explain
why
not.
That
did
not
happen
—
or
at
least
not
yet.
Instead,
the
government
threw
a
giant
hissy
fit
on
the
public
docket,
lobbing
ad
hominem
accusations
at
Judge
Boasberg
and
screeching
incoherently
about
the
separation
of
powers.
The
Court
has
now
spent
more
time
trying
to
ferret
out
information
about
the
Government’s
flight
schedules
and
relations
with
foreign
countries
than
it
did
in
investigating
the
facts
before
certifying
the
class
action
in
this
case.
That
observation
reflects
how
upside-down
this
case
has
become,
as
digressive
micromanagement
has
outweighed
consideration
of
the
case’s
legal
issues.
The
distraction
of
the
specific
facts
surrounding
the
movements
of
an
airplane
has
derailed
this
case
long
enough
and
should
end
until
the
Circuit
Court
has
had
a
chance
to
weigh
in.
It’s
a
bold
strategy,
Cotton.
It
is
similarly
bold
to
suggest
that
ex
parte
discussions
with
a
judge
who
was
the
head
of
the
FISA
court
jeopardize
national
security.
And
yet!
Worse,
the
risks
created
by
addressing
the
Court’s
pending
questions
would
undermine
the
Executive
Branch’s
ability
to
negotiate
with
foreign
sovereigns
in
the
future
by
subjecting
all
of
the
arrangements
resulting
from
any
such
negotiations—as
well
as
the
negotiations
themselves—to
a
serious
risk
of
micromanaged
and
unnecessary
judicial
fishing
expeditions
and
potential
public
disclosure.
The
DOJ
lawyers
demand
that
the
court
“stay
or
delay
its
order
to
provide
Defendants
an
opportunity
to
make
an
orderly
but
expedited
decision
as
to
whether
to
invoke
the
state
secrets
privilege
and,
if
so,
as
to
what
information.”
And
they
got
their
wish
…
sort
of.
Judge
Boasberg
did
indeed
give
them
extra
time
to
(pretend
to)
finish
their
homework.
“Although
their
grounds
for
such
request
at
first
blush
are
not
persuasive,
the
Court
will
extend
the
deadline
for
one
more
day,”
he
wrote,
exquisitely
channeling
a
rattlesnake
rearing
back
before
sinking
its
fangs
into
an
offending
flank.
“To
begin,
the
Court
seeks
this
information,
not
as
a
‘micromanaged
and
unnecessary
judicial
fishing
expedition[],’
id.
at
2,
but
to
determine
if
the
Government
deliberately
flouted
its
Orders
issued
on
March
15,
2025,
and,
if
so,
what
the
consequences
should
be,”
he
warned,
reminding
the
government
that,
irrespective
of
the
DC
Circuit
appeal,
“Whether
those
TROs
were
legally
defective
or
legally
sound
does
not
govern
the
compliance
inquiry.”
In
support,
the
court
cited
Walker
v.
City
of
Birmingham,
388
U.S.
307
(1967),
in
which
SCOTUS
upheld
the
trial
court’s
contempt
sanctions
on
a
noncompliant
party,
irrespective
of
the
whether
the
disobeyed
injunction
was
later
overturned.
Judge
Boasberg
went
on
to
remind
the
government
that
you
can’t
just
shout
“STATE
SECRETS
PRIVILEGE!”
and
run
away
laughing.
You
have
to
actually
make
a
credible
claim,
which
would
be
somewhat
undercut
here
by
the
fact
that
Secretary
of
State
Marco
Rubio
has
been
flapping
his
yap
about
this
operation
all
week
on
Twitter,
that
President
Bukele
shot
a
music
video
showcasing
the
prisoners
being
taken
off
the
plane,
and
that
multiple
members
of
the
US
government
reposted
it.
Also,
there’s
the
awkward
fact
that,
to
date,
the
DOJ
hasn’t
even
argued
that
the
flight
information
was
classified,
much
less
a
state
secret.
But
that’s
a
problem
for
another
day
—
Thursday!
Oh,
and
PS,
Judge
Boasberg
does
not
take
kindly
to
the
suggestion
that
he
can’t
be
trusted
with
non-public
information.
“The
Government
also
maintains
that
‘disclosure
of
the
information
sought
could
implicate
the
affairs
of
the
United
States
allies,’”
he
notes.
“But
it
never
explains
how
in
camera
disclosure
to
the
Court
could
possibly
lead
to
such
a
result.”
That
explanation
will
come
too
late
for
the
men
thrown
into
a
dangerous
slave
prison
based
on
nothing
more
than
the
president’s
dubious
assertion
that
they
are
members
of
a
terrorist
gang.
But
it
will
certainly
make
for
an
interesting
filing.
JGG
v.
Trump
[Docket
via
Court
Listener]
Liz
Dye lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.