The Trump administration’s misconduct complaint against Judge Boasberg and what happens now
The Trump administration filed a complaint Monday against Judge James Boasberg, an unusual move that follows clashes in court between the D.C.-based federal judge and the government over President Trump’s deportation policies.
It’s rare for the Justice Department to formally accuse judges of misconduct. The move will kick off a long, complex review process — though some legal experts say the Trump administration could have a difficult time demonstrating that Boasberg violated judicial rules.
Why did the Trump administration file a complaint against Boasberg?
The complaint accuses Boasberg of “making improper public comments” about Mr. Trump, and criticizes the judge’s rulings in a high-profile case involving Venezuelan migrants who were deported to El Salvador, according to a copy obtained by CBS News.
Much of the complaint focuses on a March session of the Judicial Conference of the United States, a panel of federal judges led by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts that weighs in on how the judicial branch is run.
The Justice Department accused Boasberg of speaking up during one part of the biannual meeting to warn that the Trump administration could “disregard rulings of federal courts,” leading to a “constitutional crisis.”
The source of those quotes is unclear, but they were first reported earlier this month by The Federalist, a conservative digital outlet that says it obtained a memo summarizing the meeting. CBS News has reached out to the Justice Department for further details.
Those comments, the government argues, violated rules requiring judges to avoid publicly comment on cases and to “act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.”
The complaint also takes issue with Boasberg’s handling of Venezuelan migrants who were rapidly flown to a Salvadoran prison under the wartime Alien Enemies Act in mid-March, less than a week after the Judicial Conference meeting.
Boasberg verbally ordered the government to return the migrants to the U.S., even if officials needed to “turn the planes around,” but the deportees were still sent to El Salvador. Since then, the judge has accused the administration of defying his orders, and has threatened to hold the government in contempt.
The Justice Department argued Monday that Boasberg “rushed the government through complex litigation, sometimes giving the Trump Administration less than 48 hours to respond.”
“Judge Boasberg publicly forecasted his baseless predictions of presidential lawlessness, then issued erroneous rulings based on that preconceived notion,” says the complaint, which was signed by Attorney General Pam Bondi’s chief of staff, Chad Mizelle.
In April, the Supreme Court halted a ruling by Boasberg blocking deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, deciding the lawsuit should have been brought in Texas, not Washington, D.C.
Legal experts say Boasberg complaint is misdirected
Several legal experts told CBS News the complaint could face a tough path.
Federal law defines judicial misconduct as “conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts.” That covers everything from harassment to making partisan statements and treating people in a “demonstrably egregious and hostile manner.”
Several law professors say that the parts of Monday’s complaint that focus on Boasberg’s handling of the deportation case are misdirected.
In general, if a party in a federal case has issues with how a judge has ruled, they’re expected to file an appeal — not a complaint against a judge — said Jeffrey Bellin, a law professor at Vanderbilt University who has served as a judicial ethics investigator.
“You’re not supposed to use the misconduct process to complain about the judge’s behavior in the case that you’re involved in,” Bellin told CBS News.
The parts of the complaint that criticize Boasberg for warning the Trump administration may defy court orders are less straightforward, says Charles Geyh, an Indiana University law professor.
The government accused the Obama-appointed judge of violating a section of the code of conduct for federal judges that says they “should not make public comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court.”
Geyh said that in some circumstances, Boasberg’s comments could be “a potential problem.”
But he still doesn’t believe Boasberg deserves disciplinary action. He said courts have been “overwhelmed” by Trump-era executive actions, “many of which are of dubious constitutionality,” and need to figure out how to preserve their legitimacy and ensure their rulings are followed.
“They need to talk about it somehow,” said Geyh.
Also, while public comments about cases aren’t allowed, if Boasberg’s remarks were made in a session of the normally private Judicial Conference, “you could make a pretty good argument, I think, that that is something different,” Geyh said.
Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School, said remarks at Judicial Conference meetings typically aren’t meant for public consumption.
She also argued Boasberg’s alleged comments about the risk of the Trump administration skirting court orders are based on “very real concerns.”
“This is not a novel issue being raised by one particular judge about, ‘what if the administration doesn’t comply,'” said Levenson.
What happens next?
It’s a complicated process that can take months.
When a complaint is filed, the first step is usually for the region’s chief appellate court judge — in this case, Judge Sri Srinivasin of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit — to review the issue and decide how to proceed.
In the vast majority of situations, the misconduct complaint is dismissed at that stage, Geyh said, noting that many complaints are from “disgruntled litigants who don’t like how their case went, and so they kvetch about what went on in their case.”
The appeals court judge can also privately take corrective action before the issue escalates. For example, they can encourage the judge to admit their mistake, said Geyh.
If the appellate judge decides a complaint has merit, they can refer it to a special committee of judges to conduct an investigation and make recommendations. Then, the region’s judicial council — yet another committee of judges — decides whether to punish them.
“The quickest thing is if they dismiss it,” Bellin said. “If they don’t dismiss it … we won’t hear about it for a while.”
How can judges be punished for misconduct?
First off, district court judges can’t be fired — unless they’re impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate, which requires two-thirds of senators to vote in favor.
“It’s very hard to discipline a sitting federal judge because they have life tenure,” said Bellin.
Short of that, a judge found to have engaged in misconduct can be publicly censured or reprimanded, or barred from taking on any new cases. The judicial conference can also choose to refer a judge to Congress for impeachment proceedings.
How common are judicial misconduct complaints?
They’re not unheard of, though punishments are rare.
Last year, Boston-based U.S. District Judge Michael Ponsor was the subject of a misconduct complaint after he criticized Supreme Court Justice Alito in a New York Times op-ed. An appellate judge didn’t take further action because Ponsor apologized.
Bellin said it’s “pretty common” for parties in cases to file complaints about judges, but “these are not usually done by people who are professional litigators.” Instead, most attorneys just work their issues with judges into their appeals.
It’s especially unusual for the Justice Department to file complaints.
“You just don’t have a history of the Justice Department having an acrimonious relationship with the judiciary,” said Geyh. “Historically, it’s just a dumb thing to do. You want an amicable relationship with the judges who are going to be deciding your cases. You don’t want to be suing them. You don’t want to be filing complaints against them.”
Still, Mr. Trump has been more openly critical of judges than his predecessors.
Besides Boasberg, the Trump administration filed a misconduct complaint in February against D.C. District Judge Ana Reyes, accusing her of “hostile and egregious misconduct” during a hearing. The D.C. appeals court has not addressed the complaint.
The administration also sued every judge in Maryland over a standing order in that court district blocking the immediate deportation of migrants challenging their removal.
Meanwhile, Mr. Trump and his staff have lashed out at judges who have ruled against the government. The president has called for Boasberg to be impeached.
“It strikes me as a bit of posturing, as an aggressive pushback by the administration against the federal judges,” Levenson said of the complaint against Boasberg. “I think it’s a real uphill battle for the administration, but the mere filing of the complaint is sort of the shot across the bow.”
contributed to this report.