Latest news with #courtorders
Fox News
6 days ago
- Politics
- Fox News
'Lawless and insane': Trump admin readies for fight after judges block Abrego Garcia removal for now
A trio of judges slowed the Trump administration's effort Wednesday to immediately deport Salvadorian migrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia for a second time, in a series of back-to-back court orders that were praised by Abrego's attorneys — but had Trump officials posturing for a fight. The orders came in a span of 90 minutes from the U.S. districts of Tennessee and Maryland and halted, for now, the Trump administration's stated plans to have Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrest Abrego Garcia and immediately begin removal proceedings to deport him to a third country, such as Mexico or South Sudan. Justice Department officials acknowledged that plan in court earlier this month, telling a federal judge in Maryland that the handoff from U.S. marshals to ICE officials would likely take place outside the federal prison where Abrego Garcia is currently being held. Those fears were bolstered further after senior Trump administration officials took to social media Wednesday to rail against the string of court rulings. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin vowed on X Wednesday that Abrego Garcia "will never walk America's streets again." "The fact this unhinged judge is trying to tell ICE they can't arrest an MS-13 gang member, indicted by a grand jury for human trafficking, and subject to immigration arrest under federal law is LAWLESS AND INSANE," she said. The remarks prompted fresh concerns from immigration advocates, as well as lawyers for Abrego Garcia and his family. "We have heightened, ongoing concerns about the Trump administration's compliance with any and all those involved" in the case, Chris Newman, an attorney who represents Abrego Garcia's family, told Fox News Digital in an interview Wednesday after the orders. His concerns came despite the string of near-term victories for Abrego Garcia, aimed at affording him due process and access to counsel ahead of his removal. In Nashville, U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw on Wednesday ordered Abrego Garcia's release from criminal custody pending trial, writing in a 37-page ruling that the federal government "fails to provide any evidence that there is something in Abrego's history, or his exhibited characteristics, that warrants detention." He also poured cold water on the dozens of allegations made by Trump officials, including by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem in Nashville last week, that Abrego Garcia is an MS-13 gang member. "Based on the record before it, for the court to find that Abrego is member of or in affiliation with MS13, it would have to make so many inferences from the government's proffered evidence in its favor that such conclusion would border on fanciful," he said. U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes, tasked with implementing that order, stayed Abrego Garcia's release from criminal detention for 30 days, a request made by his attorneys earlier this week. Two minutes after Judge Crenshaw's ruling, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, the judge overseeing his civil case in Maryland, issued an emergency order blocking the administration from immediately taking Abrego Garcia into ICE custody, citing concerns he would otherwise be removed immediately and without due process. She also ordered that Abrego Garcia be sent to the ICE Order of Supervision at the Baltimore Field Office, and that the Trump administration notify Abrego Garcia and his counsel of any plans to remove him to a third country 72 hours in advance, to ensure access to counsel and to challenge the country of removal. Lawyers for Abrego Garcia praised the court orders Wednesday, though they stressed there is a long road ahead — and one that remains fraught with uncertainty. "These rulings are a powerful rebuke of the government's lawless conduct and a critical safeguard for Kilmar's due process rights," Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, one of Abrego Garcia's attorneys, said Wednesday. However, Abrego Garcia's case has been the center of a monthslong legal maelstrom and is one that critics argue has allowed the Trump administration to test its mettle on immigration enforcement and its ability to slow-walk or evade compliance with federal courts. Whether the administration will appeal the orders Wednesday, or otherwise honor them, remains to be seen. The Supreme Court has in recent months sided with the Trump administration on a number of key court cases, as well as a flurry of emergency orders, suggesting they could move for emergency intervention at that level. Though justices on the high court ordered unanimously that the Trump administration facilitate Abrego Garcia's return to the U.S. earlier from El Salvador this year, it's unclear whether they would intervene at this point to head off the administration's planned removal. Any challenge to the Tennessee orders, including the 30-day stay, would also be heard by the conservative-majority U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which could block the lower court orders from taking force. Others noted the Trump administration's posture in recent immigration cases, including in the wake of their removal of hundreds of migrants to El Salvador's CECOT prison earlier this year. Critics argue the Trump administration has been slow, or downright recalcitrant, to comply with court orders — and their actions prompted two judges in Washington, D.C., and Maryland to threaten potential contempt proceedings earlier this year. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg's April ruling, which found there was probable cause to hold the administration in contempt for violating his order blocking them from using a wartime law to deport migrants to CECOT, was stayed by a federal appeals court. On the other hand, Trump officials have railed against the "activist" judges, who they argue have blocked their agenda and overstepped their court powers. Lawyers for Abrego Garcia and his family say they are clear-eyed about the administration and expected attempts to challenge the orders, even while the details of the efforts remain unclear. "It's now a matter of public record that their posture since the beginning is to say, 'F--- you' to the courts," Newman, the lawyer for Abrego Garcia's family, said in an interview. "So, to say that we are being vigilant about potential bad faith efforts by the Trump administration would be an understatement," he said.
Reuters
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
Brazil judge summons Bolsonaro's lawyers for incompliance with court orders, local media reports
SAO PAULO, July 21 (Reuters) - Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes summoned the lawyers of former President Jair Bolsonaro to clarify Bolsonaro's alleged non-compliance with court orders restricting his use of social media, news outlet G1 reported on Monday. Moraes gave Bolsonaro's lawyers 24 hours to present an explanation, adding that if the defense does not adequately justify the behavior, he may order the immediate arrest of the former president, according to G1. Moraes said earlier in the day that Bolsonaro may be arrested if his press interviews are published on social media, raising questions about whether the right-wing leader is allowed to talk to journalists.
Washington Post
21-07-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Tracking Trump: Harvard's lawsuit against; MLK Jr. files released; Trump wants the Commanders renamed; and more
Harvard criticized Trump's funding cuts in court. Thousands of files on MLK Jr.'s assassination were released. Trump officials have been accused of defying a third of court orders. Texas convened a special legislative session for redistricting. Trump called for a football team to return to an offensive name. Senators pressed CBS's incoming owner on Trump's claims of an ad deal.
Yahoo
20-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Democrats scramble to torpedo controversial Trump judicial nominee
Senate Judiciary Democrats are scrambling to make their case as the panel weighs the controversial judicial nomination of a Trump official accused of proposing the Justice Department (DOJ) defy court orders. Emil Bove, the principal deputy attorney general, has been nominated for a lifetime appointment to a bench of the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. Democrats made a last-ditch effort Tuesday to call a hearing with the whistleblower who said he heard Bove suggest the Trump administration should consider ignoring potential court rulings on their plans to send migrants to foreign prisons, with Bove saying they may tell the courts, 'F‑‑‑ you.' But Bove looks poised to proceed, as the one Senate Judiciary Republican who has opposed the nominee, Sen. Thom Tillis (N.C.) has signaled he would back his confirmation, which would bring a vote before the full Senate. Bove is expected to have the votes to win confirmation on the Senate floor, where Republicans have a 53-47 seat majority. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said the committee must hear from the whistleblower behind the accusations: Erez Reuveni, who was fired after a disclosure he made in a related case, telling a judge that Kilmar Abrego Garcia was deported in error. 'I don't think we should move forward with this vote until we've given the whistleblower an opportunity under oath before the committee to tell us what happened, what we have here. Mr. Bove was in a position where he was encouraging members of the Department of Justice to mislead the judge on the case. That is just unacceptable, unprofessional conduct,' Durbin said Tuesday on CNN referencing the planned Thursday vote. 'This gentleman is prepared to go under oath and to speak to the committee about what he saw and what Mr. Bove did. We should get that done before there's any vote in the committee on his nomination.' Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), however, says the vote will go forward as planned. Bove, previously a member of Trump's personal criminal defense team, currently serves in the No. 3 spot in the DOJ. Should his nomination advance Thursday, he would be launched to a sphere of the judiciary from which Supreme Court justices are often chosen. Numerous groups have also objected to Bove's nomination. Seventy-five formal federal judges signed on to a letter opposing his nomination, calling his dismissal of prosecutors, involvement in killing the bribery prosecution of New York Mayor Eric Adams (D), and nods to defying court orders 'disqualifying.' Last week, the committee released substantial documentation from Reuveni showing other DOJ employees present for a March 14 meeting referencing the expletive, as well as floating the directive to defy the courts as President Trump pushed ahead with plans to ignite the Alien Enemies Act and fly some 200 Venezuelan men to a Salvadoran prison. According to a complaint on file with the inspector general, Bove 'made a remark concerning the possibility that a court order would enjoin those removals before they could be effectuated. Bove stated thatthe DOJ would need to consider telling the courts 'f‑‑‑ you' and ignore any such court order. Mr. Reuveni perceived that others in the room looked stunned, and he observed awkward, nervous glances among people in the room.' 'Mr. Reuveni was in disbelief, because, on the contrary, the Department of Justice consistently advises its clients of their obligation to follow court orders, not to ignore them. Mr. Reuveni knew that it was absurd and unlawful to do otherwise,' the whistleblower relayed in his disclosure. The documents released by Durbin provide greater details about an episode that prompted the judge overseeing a challenge to the flights to conclude there was probable cause for criminal contempt, finding Trump administration willfully defied his order to halt or turn around the planes of migrants. In an exchange with colleagues, Reuveni can be seen discussing Bove's remarks with coworkers, saying they were reaching 'a decision point on f‑‑‑ you.' Bove said he couldn't recall whether he used the expletive but sidestepped questions about whether he ordered defiance of the courts. 'I've certainly said things encouraging litigators at the department to fight hard for valid positions that we have to take,' Bove said at his confirmation hearing. 'I certainly conveyed the importance of the upcoming operation,' he added about the Alien Enemies Act flights. Democrats have grilled Bove about his stance on the Jan. 6, 2021, riot, as the DOJ official was involved with dismissing prosecutors who worked on the cases of rioters and also demanded a list of FBI personnel who helped investigate the cases. They had hoped Tillis might side with them, given his statement in a recent CNN interview after announcing his retirement that those who 'excused' Jan. 6 would not get his backing. Bove, in written questions for the record, said he could not recall where he was as rioters stormed the Capitol but otherwise said he does not see his skepticism of Jan. 6 prosecutions as being at odds with his stance of opposing violence against law enforcement. 'As a former prosecutor with almost a decade of experience enforcing criminal laws, I condemn all forms of illegal activity. That is especially true with respect to acts of violence against law enforcement,' Bove wrote in documents obtained by The Hill. 'At the same time, based on a variety of professional experiences, I find overreach and heavy-handed tactics by prosecutors and law enforcement to be equally unacceptable.' Tillis previously opposed the nomination of another Justice Department nominee, Ed Martin, who had said Jan. 6 rioters were unfairly prosecuted. 'It was just disqualifying. I mean — he literally was excusing some of the behavior of people who entered the building,' Tillis said of Martin. 'The president should know, if there is anyone coming up for a nomination through any committee of my jurisdiction that excused January the 6th, that they're not going to get confirmed in my remaining tenure in the U.S. Senate.' But speaking with The Hill on Tuesday, Tillis reiterated his plans to follow the staff recommendation on the Bove nomination. 'Right now, the staff has a yes recommendation. I don't see any reason to oppose them,' he said. 'Anybody who excuses that behavior has a problem with me,' Tillis said about Jan. 6, but said he hadn't seen that from Bove. 'But I haven't seen that yet, and Dick Durbin didn't add any to the conversation last week,' Tillis added. For his part, Grassley also pushed back on Reuveni's allegations, saying the documents released by Durbin didn't directly show wrongdoing by Bove. 'I do not believe that they substantiate any misconduct by Mr. Bove,' Grassley wrote in a Tuesday letter to Durbin. 'Almost none of the additional documents you published include, reference, or even cite Mr. Bove. Most of the communications merely reflect Administration attorneys internally debating or discussing litigation strategy and the scope of court orders. Debate about the scope of court orders is fundamentally inconsistent with an intention to ignore them.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bondi Hit by High-Level Whistleblower Amid Epstein Backlash
Attorney General Pam Bondi scrambled Thursday to discredit a Justice Department whistleblower accusing DOJ leadership of planning to ignore court orders, piling more pressure on her leadership amid an intense backlash to her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. 'We support legitimate whistleblowers, but this disgruntled employee is not a whistleblower—he's a leaker asserting false claims seeking five minutes of fame,' Bondi fumed on X. Erez Reuveni, a former justice department attorney, filed a complaint to the Senate last month alleging that senior DOJ official and federal judge nominee Emil Bove suggested in a March 14 meeting that DOJ staff should say 'f--- you' to courts and defy any order blocking migrant deportation flights from taking off to the CECOT megaprison in El Salvador the next day. The DOJ fired Reuveni on April 11, after he admitted in court that officials mistakenly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia on one of those flights. On Thursday, the whistleblower submitted new evidence to the Senate, including internal DOJ messages that appear to support his claim that Bove said the DOJ might have to ignore court rulings. Bondi launched a fierce defense of Bove, who has denied the allegation, in her X post. 'No one was ever asked to defy a court order,' she wrote. 'This is another instance of misinformation being spread to serve a narrative that does not align with the facts.' Forced to walk back her February claim that a client list was 'sitting' on her desk, she was ridiculed online by frustrated Trump supporters—many of whom had hoped his return to office would finally expose secrets about powerful elites. In his first public interview since coming forward, Reuveni told The New York Times that the Trump administration displayed a troubling disregard for the law. 'If they can do this sort of thing to Abrego Garcia, to 238 people that nobody knows, and send them to CECOT forever with no due process, they can do that to anyone,' said Reuveni, who worked at the agency for more than 14 years before his firing. 'It should be deeply, deeply worrisome to anyone who cares about their safety and their liberty, that the government can, without showing evidence to anyone of anything, spirit you away on a plane to wherever, forever.' He accused the DOJ of 'thumbing its nose at the courts, and putting Justice Department attorneys in an impossible position where they have to choose between loyalty to the agenda of the president and their duty to the court.' Bove's nomination to serve as a judge on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals is likely to advance after a key swing vote on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Thom Thillis (R-NC), said he will 'probably' support him, according to Politico.
