Explained: The Misconduct Complaint Against Judge James Boasberg

Newsweek

5 days ago

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a formal misconduct complaint against Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, a prominent federal judge in Washington, D.C., accusing him of violating judicial ethics by making improper public remarks about President Donald Trump and his administration.
Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the move on July 28. Newsweek contacted the DOJ for comment by email outside regular working hours.
Why It Matters
Boasberg is presiding over Martínez v. Mayorkas, a high-profile case brought by a group of Venezuelan asylum-seekers who allege that their transfer to a Salvadoran detention facility on March 15 violated federal law and international human rights norms.
The DOJ filed its complaint days after Boasberg said he was considering disciplinary proceedings against government lawyers for their conduct in that case, Reuters reported. The move raises questions about potential retaliation and the separation of powers between the judiciary and executive branch.
Judge James Boasberg, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, at an American Board Association panel discussion at the Marriott Marquis in Washington, D.C., on April 2.
Judge James Boasberg, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, at an American Board Association panel discussion at the Marriott Marquis in Washington, D.C., on April 2.
AFP via Getty Images/Drew Angerer
What To Know
What Is a Judicial Misconduct Complaint?
A judicial misconduct complaint is a formal allegation filed against a sitting federal judge claiming behavior that violates the Code of Conduct for United States Judges.
These complaints are reviewed by the appropriate judicial council—in this case, likely the D.C. Circuit—and may lead to disciplinary actions, including reprimand, censure or even referral for impeachment in severe cases. However, most complaints are dismissed or resolved confidentially unless clear evidence of serious misconduct emerges.
What Boasberg Said That Sparked the Complaint
The DOJ complaint cites comments Boasberg made at the Judicial Conference in March, where he expressed concern that the Trump administration would "disregard rulings of federal courts" and trigger "a constitutional crisis."
According to the complaint, Boasberg's words and conduct "erode public confidence in judicial neutrality, and warrant a formal investigation under Rule 11," which stipulates how a chief judge of a U.S. Court of Appeals should respond when a judicial misconduct or disability complaint is filed.
The department said the judge's remarks undermined the appearance of judicial neutrality and breached ethical standards requiring judges to avoid political commentary.
What the Complaint Against Boasberg Says
According to the court document obtained by Newsweek, the DOJ has accused Boasberg of violating Canon 1, Canon 2(A) and Canon 3(A)(6) of the judicial code, which prohibit judges from making "public comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court" and require them to maintain impartiality and "uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary."
The complaint further said Boasberg's conduct had called into question the integrity of pending proceedings and eroded public confidence in the judiciary's ability to fairly adjudicate matters involving the executive branch.
What People are Saying
Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote on X on Monday: "Today at my direction, the Justice Department filed a misconduct complaint against U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration. These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, and we will not stand for that."
What Happens Next
The complaint signals a sharp escalation in the broader institutional conflict between Trump's Justice Department and federal courts handling cases related to his administration's policies.