Another judicial showdown is brewing in Washington, D.C., as the Trump administration locks horns with a federal judge over immigration enforcement.

The clash centers on U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who’s been temporarily halted by a federal appeals court from holding contempt hearings next week, following a push by the Department of Justice to not only pause his review but boot him from a high-stakes deportation case entirely.

This saga kicked off back in March when President Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members as part of a broader immigration crackdown.

Early tensions over deportation orders

Boasberg, appointed by former President Obama, issued an order to stop deportation flights, a move that quickly drew the ire of Republican lawmakers and the administration.

Despite the order, over 100 Venezuelan men were flown to El Salvador for imprisonment, a clear violation that has fueled accusations of defiance from federal officials.

The Justice Department, in a filing last month, pointed the finger at DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for directing the continuation of those flights, raising questions about accountability at the highest levels.

Whistleblower claims ignite firestorm

A former DOJ employee, Erez Reuveni, stepped forward with whistleblower disclosures, alleging that officials knew about the flights and disregarded court mandates.

Reuveni’s documents include urgent emails from the night of March 15, when the ACLU scrambled for a court order to block the deportations, suggesting DOJ attorney Drew Ensign may have misled Boasberg about the situation.

Reuveni even claimed Ensign was fully aware, stating, “He knows they are being removed... about the flights,” a damning accusation that cuts to the heart of judicial trust (Erez Reuveni).

DOJ fires back at Boasberg

The DOJ isn’t holding back, arguing there’s a “strong appearance that the district judge is engaged in a pattern of retaliation and harassment, and has developed too strong a bias to preside over this matter impartially” (Department of Justice).

Let’s unpack that—when the DOJ accuses a judge of bias, it’s not just a legal spat; it’s a signal they believe the judiciary is overstepping into political territory, a concern many conservatives share about unelected officials thwarting policy.

Boasberg’s push for criminal contempt referrals against administration officials, coupled with testimony demands from Ensign and Reuveni, only adds fuel to the fire of perceived judicial overreach.

Political heat and impeachment calls

The political stakes couldn’t be higher, with President Trump himself calling for Boasberg’s impeachment over the handling of the March deportation orders.

More than a dozen Republican lawmakers have co-sponsored articles of impeachment, signaling that this isn’t just a courtroom battle—it’s a full-on conservative rallying cry against what they see as activist judging.

While the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has paused the contempt hearings for now to weigh the government’s arguments, the underlying tension between enforcing immigration law and judicial oversight remains a powder keg waiting to explode.