A divided federal appeals court panel on Tuesday ordered U.S. District Judge James Boasberg to halt his criminal contempt investigation into the Trump administration over deportation flights that carried Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador in March 2025, finding that the probe constituted an abuse of discretion.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit concluded that Boasberg lacked a sufficiently clear and specific order to support contempt proceedings against administration officials. Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, writing for the majority, said the Trump administration has a “clear and indisputable” right to end the proceedings.
“The legal error at the heart of these criminal contempt proceedings demonstrates why further investigation by the district court is an abuse of discretion,” Rao wrote. “Criminal contempt is available only for the violation of an order that is clear and specific. (Boasberg’s March 2025 order) did not clearly and specifically bar the government from transferring plaintiffs into Salvadoran custody.”
Rao, who was nominated by President Donald Trump, was joined by Circuit Judge Justin Walker, another Trump appointee, who filed a concurring opinion. Circuit Judge J. Michelle Childs, nominated by former President Joe Biden, dissented in an 80-page opinion, arguing that the majority improperly interfered with Boasberg’s authority.
Childs warned the ruling could have broader consequences. “Now, any litigant can argue, based on their preferred interpretation of a court’s order, that they did not commit contempt before contempt findings are even made,” she wrote.
The decision marks a new development in a legal dispute stemming from Boasberg’s temporary restraining order issued March 15, 2025, which sought to block the transfer of certain Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador under an 18th-century law. Despite the order, two planeloads of migrants were sent to El Salvador, where they were detained in a high-security prison. The administration attributed the decision to then–Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Boasberg had previously raised concerns that the administration may have acted in bad faith by expediting the deportations. He said he provided officials “ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions,” but ultimately found their responses unsatisfactory.
Lee Gelernt, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union representing the migrants, said the plaintiffs intend to seek review by the full D.C. Circuit. “Our system is built on the executive branch, including the president, respecting court orders,” Gelernt said. “In this case there is no longer any question that the Trump administration willfully violated the court’s order.” He described the panel’s ruling as “a blow to the rule of law.”
The White House has repeatedly criticized Boasberg, an appointee of former President Barack Obama who serves as chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accusing him of exceeding his authority in the case.
The ruling also arrives amid broader criticism of Boasberg from some Republican lawmakers. In late 2025, Sens. Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Josh Hawley and others called for his impeachment following disclosures that he approved nondisclosure orders authorizing subpoenas for phone records of several GOP senators during Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into matters related to the 2020 election.
Those subpoenas, part of an FBI inquiry known as “Arctic Frost,” obtained call logs from lawmakers including Cruz, Graham, and Hawley without notifying them, based on concerns that disclosure could risk evidence tampering.
Cruz accused Boasberg of acting as a “partisan crusader” and urged impeachment, calling him “a radical leftist judge who is out of control.” Other Republicans, including Reps. Chip Roy and Brandon Gill, echoed those calls, describing the actions as an abuse of power that they said conflicted with legal protections for congressional communications. Draft articles of impeachment circulated in the House, though such efforts have faced significant hurdles.
The contempt dispute has become a focal point in the Trump administration’s broader deportation policy, with the White House framing Boasberg’s actions as part of a wider pattern of judicial activism that puts leftwing “resistance” ahead of the law. The Justice Department has previously filed a misconduct complaint against the judge over public remarks, and Trump has publicly called for his impeachment. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts rejected those calls in a rare public statement.
The appeals court’s decision pauses the contempt proceedings for now, though the full D.C. Circuit could still take up the case if plaintiffs pursue review by the entire court.
[Read More: GOP Congressman Steps Down After Infidelity]
