A federal judge admonished the Justice Department Monday for disobeying his order to turn around two planes en route to El Salvador that were carrying alleged Tren de Aragua gang members. He also demanded explanations about removal flights ordered since President Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act Saturday.
During a hearing on the Trump administration’s compliance with his order, D.C District Chief Judge James Boasberg demanded answers by Tuesday at noon to clarify what occurred Saturday — both before and after he blocked the government’s removal flights. He asked the government whether additional planes have left the U.S. with Tren de Aragua gang members, and he wants a timeline showing when the flights took off from the U.S. and landed in El Salvador and a count of remaining members of the gang in U.S. custody.
Boasberg also demanded detailed timing on when President Trump’s order invoking the Alien Enemies Act was signed and went into effect. The 1798 act is a wartime authority allowing the president to detain and deport noncitizens. Mr. Trump is utilizing the act to detain and deport all Venezuelan migrants 14 years of age and older who are suspected of being members of the Tren de Aragua gang.
A Justice Department attorney argued that because the judge did not put his order demanding the planes to return to the U.S. in writing, the government was not bound by it, but he added that even if the order had been written, the president had the authority to keep the flights en route to their final destination.
“You’re telling me your first argument is when I said those things, because I didn’t say it in a minute order that the plaintiffs didn’t have to turn around, you didn’t have to comply?” Boasberg said. “You’re saying that you felt you could disregard it because it wasn’t in a written order?”
The attorney did not provide details about how many deportation flights left Saturday, claiming that there were “operational issues” prohibiting him from answering. When Judge Boesberg mentioned the two flights that departed Texas at 5:26 p.m. and 5:45 p.m. local time, the attorney said that he was “not at liberty” to provide information about the flights.
It sparked a tense back and forth between Judge Boesberg and the government over whether or not it was asserting the flight information was classified.
The Justice Department also argued that because the planes were over international waters and airspace by the time the judge ordered them to turn around, that Boasberg no longer had jurisdiction over the migrants.
The judge responded that his order applied to the planes, regardless of where they were in the air.
The Trump administration said the two planes had left before the judge made his decision, and a third plane left for El Salvador shortly afterwards, though details about the passengers on that plane are unclear.
Despite Boasberg’s ruling, 261 people were deported to El Salvador Saturday,137 of whom were removed under the Alien Enemies Act over alleged gang ties, a senior administration official said.
The judge’s ruling responded to a federal civil lawsuit against Mr. Trump and other administration officials filed Saturday by five Venezuelan men in immigration custody in Texas and New York local jails.
Boasberg’s ruling prevents the deportations of the plaintiffs and migrants for 14 days. The Justice Department appealed that decision, arguing the D.C. federal court has no authority over the case because none of the five men are being held in the District of Columbia.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote on X Saturday night that the “written order and the Administration’s actions do not conflict,” and said a “single judge in a single city cannot direct the movements of an aircraft carrying foreign alien terrorists who were physically expelled from U.S. soil.”
Wrapping up the hearing, Boasberg said he’d issue a written order quickly because “apparently my oral orders don’t seem to carry much weight” with the Justice Department.
Before the hearing, the Justice Department filed an appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals requesting Boasberg’s removal from the case, arguing that his actions in the case have been an “inappropriate exercise of jurisdiction” and claiming he had followed “highly unusual and improper procedures,” in his hearing on Saturday evening.
