DEFENDING THE COURTS
In re DONALD J. TRUMP
Former senior Justice Department officials urged a federal judge to keep investigating whether the Trump D.O.J. violated a court order while carrying out deportations.
THE IMPACT
If the Trump administration can shut down an inquiry into whether it defied a court order, one of the most fundamental checks on executive power will be severely weakened.
THE BRIEF
In March 2025, Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order barring the deportation of a group of Venezuelan men to El Salvador. When the Trump administration proceeded with deportations despite that order, Judge Boasberg began criminal contempt proceedings. The administration sought to stop those proceedings and now a full panel of Judges will determine whether the contempt inquiry may continue.
Our amicus brief leverages the perspective of bipartisan former Department of Justice (D.O.J.) officials to support the completion of this inquiry. The officials, who have decades of experience supervising D.O.J. lawyers in criminal and civil investigations and representing D.O.J. at all levels of the federal courts, argue, “court-initiated factfinding is a pivotal feature of our constitutional order of checks and balances, and a process that D.O.J. has historically embraced in cases that have merited such inquiry.” In this extraordinary case, prematurely ending the inquiry “may cause long-term damage to the Department and to the public’s confidence in the Judiciary,” the officials warn.
THE TEAM
The bipartisan former Justice Department officials are represented pro bono by Free + Fair and Joseph Baio.
