NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A federal appeals court granted the Trump administration’s request Friday to temporarily halt contempt proceedings ordered by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg as he weighs whether senior administration officials willfully violated a March 15 emergency court order, delivering a victory, if temporarily, to the Trump administration as it seeks to head off testimony from two key government witnesses.
Judges for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-1 on Friday to grant the Trump administration’s request to temporarily stay proceedings in the contempt inquiry led by Judge Boasberg. At issue before the court was the Trump administration’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador in March, and whether senior Trump officials hd willfully defied a court order in allowing the deportation flights to continue.
“The purpose of this administrative stay is to allow the court time to render a decision on the mandamus petition and the stay motion,” Judges Neomi Rao and Justin Walker said in the short emergency order.
They stressed that the decision is temporary, and “should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits” of the emergency petition, which had been filed by the Trump administration hours earlier.
Still, it heads off, if only for now, the witness testimony of two current and former Justice Department employees who were expected to appear in court early next week to testify in the ongoing contempt probe. Both officials were slated to be questioned by counsel and by lawyers for the plaintiffs representing the class of deported migrants, prompting fierce objection from the Trump administration.
Lawyers for the Justice Department had asked the court hours earlier to block U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s newly revived contempt inquiry into its Alien Enemies Act deportations, and argued in a new filing that the appeals court should intervene to block the contempt inquiry altogether, or at the very least, block the scheduled testimony of two DOJ officials scheduled for next week.
They had asked the appeals court to intervene by 5 p.m. Friday.
In the emergency petition, Justice Department lawyers blasted the contempt inquiry as an “idiosyncratic and misguided inquiry” outside the district court’s jurisdiction.
Short of terminating the proceedings, they asked the appeals court to bar testimony from two current and former officials who had been ordered to appear for questioning next week.
Lawyers for the Trump administration also requested that the appeals court order the case be reassigned from Boasberg, the judge whom Trump officials accused Friday of being “engaged in a pattern of retaliation and harassment” in his consideration of the case.
“This latest order portends a circus that threatens the separation of powers and the attorney-client privilege alike,” they argued Friday. “This long-running saga never should have begun; should not have continued at all after this Court’s last intervention; and certainly should not be allowed to escalate into the unseemly and unnecessary interbranch conflict that it now imminently portends.”
Judge James E. Boasberg, chief judge of the Federal District Court in Washington, D.C., stands for a portrait at E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, D.C. on March 16, 2023. (Carolyn Van Houten / Washington Post via Getty)
The contempt inquiry had been expected to bring to the fore long-simmering tension between the Trump administration and the chief judge for the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., who sparked Trump’s ire earlier this year after he attempted to temporarily block the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador in March.
While the stay is new, the arguments in the case are not.
Justice Department lawyers in their argument echoed many of the claims they made in a separate court filing earlier this week. “At the outset, the Court’s inquiry exceeds its authority and is now intruding on the prerogatives of a co-equal branch,” they told Judge Boasberg in a motion to reconsider, which he denied. They argued that in their view, that criminal contempt falls within the executive branch’s power.
“Criminal contempt is a criminal offense, and the investigation and prosecution of crimes is [a] core executive power reserved to the Executive Branch,” they added.
Boasberg this week had requested the testimony of senior Justice Department officials who played a key role in the Trump administration’s use of the 18th century wartime law to quickly deport the migrants to El Salvador in March, despite his temporary restraining order and subsequent oral order that attempted to block — for 14 days — the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to immediately deport the migrants.
Drew Ensign, the Justice Department’s deputy assistant attorney general, had been scheduled to appear in court Monday for questioning and for cross-examination from lawyers representing the class of deported Venezuelan migrants, as part of the contempt inquiry.
He also ordered testimony and cross-examination the following day from former Justice Department lawyer Erez Reuveni, who since parting ways with the Justice Department has publicly accused the administration of ignoring court orders — including in this case.
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ASKS SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW EL SALVADOR DEPORTATION FLIGHT CASE
U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem speaks at a news conference at Harry Reid International Airport, Saturday, Nov. 22, 2025, in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/Ronda Churchill)
“The Court thus believes that it is necessary to hear witness testimony to better understand the basis of the decision to transfer the deportees out of United States custody in the context of the hearing on March 15, 2025,” Boasberg wrote in scheduling the appearances.
“The events surrounding this decision should shed light on this question,” he said.
The inquiry was revived after the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, had vacated an earlier ruling and returned the matter to Boasberg. New details about the government’s handling of the March flights have already emerged, with additional disclosures expected in the coming days.
Still, court filings revealed that the Trump administration plans to fight those efforts at every turn.
“If the Court does proceed with testimony, it should grant a protective order with respect to privileged information or provide Defendants with an opportunity to seek appellate relief in advance of any testimony; and the Court should also limit the scope of the testimony and preclude Plaintiffs from participating,” they told Boasberg.
TRUMP FOE BOASBERG ORDERS DOJ TO DETAIL STATUS OF CECOT MIGRANTS SENT TO VENEZUELA
A person holds up a sign referencing the Centre for Terrorism Confinement (CECOT) prison in El Salvador during a May Day demonstration against President Donald Trump and his immigration policies in Houston, Texas, on May 1, 2025. (RONALDO SCHEMIDT / AFP)
Last month, DOJ officials identified DHS Secretary Kristi Noem as the official who authorized the transfer of the Venezuelan migrants after being briefed on Boasberg’s emergency order by lawyers for the Justice Department and acting general counsel for DHS.
Boasberg said earlier this week that it would be “premature” to refer anyone for prosecution under the revived contempt probe, and declined to immediately compel testimony from Noem at this stage in the process.
Noem said in a declaration of her own that she made that call based on legal advice from lawyers for the Justice Department, as well as the acting general counsel for DHS.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The fresh action on the contempt issue is almost certain to spark the ire of some Republicans in Congress and from Trump himself, who has repeatedly excoriated Boasberg as an “activist judge” for his role in the Alien Enemies Act case and resulting inquiry.
Boasberg, for his part, has appeared unfazed. “This has been sitting for a long time,” Boasberg said late last month of the contempt inquiry, “and I believe justice requires me to move promptly on this.”
The government, he added, “can assist me to whatever degree it wishes.”
