Judge in Trump deportation case calls administration lawyers’ argument a ‘heck of a stretch’ – live
Trump admin calls judge’s oral order blocking deportation flights ‘not enforceable’
Lawyers for the administration of Donald Trump argued that a judge’s oral order blocking the deportation of more than 200 alleged Venezuelan gang members was “not enforceable”, according to a court filing on Monday, Reuters reports.
In the filing, the Trump administration also argued that a 5pm hearing on the dispute today should be cancelled, because “plaintiffs cannot use these proceedings to interfere with the President’s national-security and foreign-affairs authority, and the Court lacks jurisdiction to do so.”
The New York Times characterized the Trump administration’s filing as a “brazen display of defiance”, noting that “the Justice Department had filed papers less than two hours before the 5 p.m. hearing was to be held,” in which district judge James E Boasberg was demanding an explanation from the Trump administration about why his Saturday order order temporarily blocking the deportation flights had apparently been ignored.
Key events
Trump administration officials continue their attacks on deportation flight judge
CNN reports: “White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller today said the White House believes the Supreme Court will back its efforts to deport migrants.”
Earlier today, Miller attacked US district judge James Boasberg, who held a hearing today asking the Trump administration to explain whether it had simply ignored his order to turn around flights attempting to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members by invoking the Alien Enemies Act, a law from 1798 that is meant to be used during wartime.
Stephen Miller (@stephenm): “A district court judge has no authority to direct the national security operations of the executive branch. The president is operating at the apex of his authority…” pic.twitter.com/aautEE0WDx
— CSPAN (@cspan) March 17, 2025
CSPAN has more on Miller’s comments:
Stephen Miller (@stephenm): “If a district court judge can be involved in the conduct of our foreign policy, under no definition do we have a democracy in this country we no longer have a democracy.” pic.twitter.com/Qe6q8U6kT1
— CSPAN (@cspan) March 17, 2025
As we noted earlier, the Trump administration also wrote a letter today asking the United States court of appeals for the District of Columbia to remove Boasberg from the case:
Ensign: “This Court should also immediately reassign this case to another district court judge given the highly unusual and improper procedures—e.g. certification of a class action involving members of a designated foreign terrorist organization” https://t.co/JBTuJeQoRu
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Judge tells Trump DoJ to provide more details on deportation flights by noon on Tuesday
A high-stakes hearing over whether the Trump administration simply ignored a judge’s order to turn around its flights deporting alleged Venezuelan gang members has ended, multiple news outlets are reporting.
US district judge James Boasberg said he would not make any rulings today about whether the Trump administration violated his order, but has asked the administration to “tell him by noon on Tuesday exactly what time it believes his order stopping the deportation flights went into effect on Saturday”, the New York Times’ Alan Feuer reports.
Politico’s Kyle Cheney characterized Boasberg as “incredulous” in response to some of the Trump administration lawyer’s arguments that Boasberg’s order had no power outside of US airspace.
The hearing is over. Boasberg was incredulous that DOJ claimed he had no authority to order the plane to turn around just because it crossed out of US airspace — something he said was well-established in many contexts.
He wants details about whether DOJ openly defied his order…
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) March 17, 2025
Could the Trump administration have responded to an order to turn around its deportation flights by complying with the order, and then taking legal action to appeal or modify it, Judge James Boasberg asks, rather “than say, ‘We don’t care.’”
Adam Klasfeld reporting from the deportation flights hearing just now:
Judge Boasberg presses the DOJ lawyer on what the government could have done with a ruling they believed to be unlawful: appeal or seek to modify it.
“Isn’t then the better course — to return the planes to the United States and figure out what to do, than say, ‘We don’t care;…
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) March 17, 2025
CNN similarly reports that Boasberg has characterized the justice department’s reasoning in response to his order as “‘We don’t care, we’ll do what we want.’”
Earlier today, an American legal expert said the legal argument the Trump administration is currently making at a court hearing “borders on the absurd”, and that it was also “contrary to well settled constitutional law”.
Michael J Gerhardt, a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law, told Reuters the Trump administration’s argument about the court order not applying because of the geographical location of the planes at a particular time “borders on the absurd” and was “contrary to well settled constitutional law” holding that federal officials are subject to the constitution no matter where they are.
“A governmental plane on governmental business is not in a law-free zone,” Gerhardt said, adding: “If that is not the case, then the government can simply do anything it apparently wants to do so long as it is not operating any longer on American soil.”
This is an argument that top Trump administration officials are also making publicly, Reuters reported.
“I think there’s a fundamental question to ask here, and that is: how can a judge sitting in Washington DC have jurisdiction over three planes filled of criminals flying over the Gulf of America?” secretary of state Marco Rubio said on Fox News, using the term Trump prefers for the Gulf of Mexico.
Another issue for the deportation flights: a court order’s validity outside of US airspace
The Trump justice department is also arguing that the judge’s order to turn around the deportation flights did not apply once the planes were in international air space. As my colleague Hugo Lowell reports, Judge James Boasberg is not particularly impressed with this argument:
Boasberg is unimpressed with DOJ’s 2nd argument that the planes were in international airspace anyway. “The problem is the equitable power of United States courts is not so limited…equity is extra-territorial…it’s not a question that the plane was or was not in US airspace”
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
The Trump administration is arguing that once the planes are in international airspace, US courts no longer have jurisdiction over them.
DOJ says they believe the court lost jurisdiction the moment the planes were outside of US airspace. “What we have said is that when they have been physically removed, the statue is complete and the court has lost jurisdiction.”
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Boasberg flatly denies that the powers of a court order over US officials end based on geographical territory.
DOJ: “When an operation crosses into international territory, there are other powers at play beyond the Alien Enemies Act”
Boasberg: “I think my equitable powers are pretty clear that they do not lapse at the airspace’s edge. My equtiable powers do not lapse at that point.”
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
‘Heck of a stretch’: deportation hearing focuses on judge’s oral versus written orders
The standoff between the Trump administration and the judiciary hinges in part over the Trump administration’s argument that it had to comply only with Judge James Boasberg’s written order that the deportation flights needed to be turned around, not the order he made aloud at a hearing.
Per my colleague Hugo Lowell:
DOJ says they think they complied with written order. They say Boasberg only said the planes needed to be turned around in oral statements at the hearing, and not in the written order, and “oral statements are not injunctions”
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Boasberg responded by calling the Trump administration’s attempt to differentiate between his oral and written arguments “a heck of a stretch”.
Boasberg is unimpressed: “You felt that you could disregard it because it wasn’t in the written order. That’s your first argument? The idea that because my written order was pithier so it could be disregarded, that’s one heck of a stretch I think”
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Trump admin lawyer cites national security in refusal to answer deportation questions
As my colleague Hugo Lowell is reporting, the Trump administration’s lawyer is arguing in a high-stakes hearing that he cannot provide any answers to a judge’s question about the timing and number of deportation flights because of national security reasons.
Judge James Boasberg has called the hearing to determine if the administration continued with the deportation flights this week in violation of a court order.
DOJ says they will not provide answers about the flights — when they took off and how many — even to the judge, on national security grounds. Are the answers classified? Boasberg asks. DOJ needs to make a showing to say they won’t tell even him
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Boasberg has responded that the Trump administration needs to provide more information in order to demonstrate that the information requested is classified, citing a key 1953 case.
Boasberg tells DOJ: “If what you’re saying is it’s classified and you can’t tell me, then you’re going to need to make a good showing. For example, in the state secrets case of US v Reynolds … even then, you would have to make a showing to me”
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
The 5pm ET hearing over whether the Trump administration deported people in violation of a judge’s order has begun.
My colleague Hugo Lowell reports that the judge has opened with an explanation that the goal of the hearing is fact-finding on whether the Trump administration complied with his order temporarily barring certain deportations.
Chief Judge James Boasberg says today’s hearing is fact-finding on government’s compliance with his temporary restraining orders barring deportation of suspected Venezuelan gang members. He’s not planning to issue any rulings
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Abhishek Kambli, a lawyer for the justice department, has initially refused to provide more details in response to the judge’s questions, The New York Times’ Alan Feuer and my colleague both report.
DOJ lawyer says he’s not liberty or authorized to disclose any info on how many deportation flights went ahead. Says no planes took off after the judge’s written order came down
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Amid an escalating standoff today between Trump’s justice department and the judiciary that threatens to become a full constitutional crisis, Donald Trump has announced he will release the remaining classified files related to the 1963 assassination of John F Kennedy, the Associated Press reports:
While at the Kennedy Center, Trump told reporters his administration will release 80,000 files on Tuesday, though it’s not clear how many of those are among the millions of documents that have already been made public.
“We have a tremendous amount of paper. You’ve got a lot of reading,” Trump said to reporters.
He also said he doesn’t believe anything will be redacted from the files.
“I said, ‘Just don’t redact. You can’t redact,’” he said.
Trump’s justice department seeks removal of judge presiding over case on deportation flights
As my colleague Hugo Lowell reports, the Trump administration is now seeking to remove Judge James Boasberg from the deportation flights case, a further escalation in what legal experts are calling a “potential constitutional clash between Trump and judiciary”.
New: The Trump admin is asking the DC Circuit to kick Chief US district judge James Boasberg off the deportations case, complaining that he improperly turned it into a class action suit and that they cannot “and will not” be forced to answer nat sec questions at today’s hearing
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
DOJ DAAG Drew Ensign: “The Government cannot—and will not—be forced to answer sensitive questions of national security and foreign relations in a rushed posture without orderly briefing… Answering them, especially on the proposed timetable, is flagrantly improper”
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Ensign: “This Court should also immediately reassign this case to another district court judge given the highly unusual and improper procedures—e.g. certification of a class action involving members of a designated foreign terrorist organization” https://t.co/JBTuJeQoRu
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) March 17, 2025
Judge denies Trump administration’s motion to cancel hearing on deportation flights
US district judge James Boasberg has denied the Trump administration’s legal filing this afternoon asking cancel a planned 5pm hearing in which he has asked the administration’s lawyers to explain why his Saturday order temporarily blocking the deportation flights had apparently been ignored.
The Trump administration’s Monday filing, which argued that the hearing should be cancelled, said that the administration’s lawyers had no further information that they were authorized to share, and described cancelling the hearing as a way to “de-escalate the grave incursions on Executive Branch authority that have already arisen”.
The New York Times characterized the filing as a “brazen display of defiance”.
Several legal experts interviewed by Reuters have described the deportation flights as a direct challenge to the judicial branch’s independence, setting up a potential constitutional clash between the executive branch and the American judiciary.
Trump admin calls judge’s oral order blocking deportation flights ‘not enforceable’
Lawyers for the administration of Donald Trump argued that a judge’s oral order blocking the deportation of more than 200 alleged Venezuelan gang members was “not enforceable”, according to a court filing on Monday, Reuters reports.
In the filing, the Trump administration also argued that a 5pm hearing on the dispute today should be cancelled, because “plaintiffs cannot use these proceedings to interfere with the President’s national-security and foreign-affairs authority, and the Court lacks jurisdiction to do so.”
The New York Times characterized the Trump administration’s filing as a “brazen display of defiance”, noting that “the Justice Department had filed papers less than two hours before the 5 p.m. hearing was to be held,” in which district judge James E Boasberg was demanding an explanation from the Trump administration about why his Saturday order order temporarily blocking the deportation flights had apparently been ignored.
The day so far
The Trump administration is facing a backlash for flying undocumented migrants suspected of being part of a Venezuelan gang out of the country, despite a judge’s order to halt the deportation while court proceedings play out. At her briefing today, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called the removals a “counter-terrorism operation” and argued they had technically complied with the judge’s instructions at the time they were delivered. Advocacy groups representing some of the deportees disagreed, saying they were “extremely concerned” that the White House had defied the court’s orders. A hearing scheduled for 5pm may reveal more. Donald Trump busied himself with sending threats to Iran and visiting the Kennedy Center, where he promised to make Washington DC “great again”.
Here’s what else has happened today:
-
Chuck Schumer, the Democratic senate minority leader, has reportedly canceled a book tour as he faces protests for providing votes crucial to the passage of a Republican spending bill.
-
Trump said Joe Biden’s pardon of January 6 committee lawmakers was “void”, and Leavitt later said, without evidence, that the former president may not have been of sound mind when he gave it.
-
The director of Project 2025 is very happy with the Trump administration’s decisions so far.
