In a striking move, the Department of Justice (DOJ) refused on Tuesday to provide specific details requested by U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg regarding controversial deportation flights executed under President Donald Trump’s administration.
At Monday’s contentious court hearing, Judge Boasberg ordered DOJ attorneys to submit detailed written explanations concerning flights deporting alleged Venezuelan gang members, which utilized a rarely invoked 18th-century law. The judge demanded clarity on several issues: how many flights departed due to Trump’s executive order, the number of individuals aboard those flights, destinations, and precise timelines.
More: Rachel Maddow Warns of ‘Armed Assault’ Amid DOGE-Led Federal Takeover
More: Trump Claims ‘Massive Mandate’ to Reshape America—But Do Voters Agree?
However, instead of supplying direct answers, the DOJ’s Tuesday response, authored by Attorney General Pam Bondi, refused compliance with the judge’s instructions, explicitly challenging the court’s request. “The Government maintains that there is no justification to order the provision of additional information and that doing so would be inappropriate,” Bondi asserted in the filing.
“Even accepting Plaintiffs’ account of the facts, there was no violation of the Court’s written order (since the relevant flights left U.S. airspace, and so their occupants were ‘removed,’ before the order issued), and the Court’s earlier oral statements were not independently enforceable as injunctions.”
Bondi continued, reinforcing the DOJ’s stance on resisting the judicial demand: “The Government stands on those arguments.” Nevertheless, Bondi acknowledged that should the court persist in seeking this information, the DOJ requested that it be shared confidentially. “If, however, the Court nevertheless orders the Government to provide additional details, the Court should do so through an in-camera and ex parte declaration, in order to protect sensitive information bearing on foreign relations,” the filing stated.
This latest confrontation highlights ongoing tensions between the judiciary and the executive branch under Trump’s administration, particularly regarding immigration enforcement actions that have drawn significant legal scrutiny and public debate.
More: Leaked Memo Reveals Trump Admin’s Controversial Plan to Gut Social Security Phone Services
More:Â Trump Weighs Recognizing Crimea as Russian in Bombshell Ukraine Deal Report
The refusal to fully comply with Judge Boasberg’s direct order has sparked concerns about transparency and accountability, intensifying criticism from immigration advocates and legal analysts who argue that withholding such crucial details undermines judicial oversight.
The DOJ’s actions signify a broader struggle over executive authority and judicial oversight, marking another chapter in contentious legal battles surrounding immigration policy and national security during Trump’s presidency.
For You:
- Baby Dies After Parents Allegedly Rubbed Alcohol on Her Mouth to Soothe Crying
- Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly planning big move to mend damaged reputation
- Michelle Obama Breaks Silence on Skipping Trump’s Big Day
- Prince Harry recently claimed that the Royal family took away his security to force him to return
- New Study Finds Blood Pressure Meds May Slash Dementia Risk by 15%