WASHINGTON (CN) — Attorney General Pam Bondi announced Monday evening that she directed the Justice Department to file a misconduct complaint against Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg for “making improper public comments” about President Donald Trump and his administration.
“These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, and we will not stand for that,” Bondi said in an X post announcing the complaint.
According to the Department of Justice in its complaint, filed by Bondi’s Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle, Boasberg’s apparent misconduct began at a March 11 session of the Judicial Conference of the United States where he “attempted to improperly influence” Chief Justice John Roberts and roughly two dozen other federal judges.
Judicial Conference sessions are not open to the public. The first mention of Boasberg’s apparent comments were reported by the right-wing outlet The Federalist, citing a memo penned by an unnamed member of the Judicial Conference, summarizing the March session.
There, Boasberg, a Barack Obama appointee, expressed his belief that the Trump administration would “disregard rulings of federal courts” and trigger “a constitutional crisis,” according to the DOJ.
“Although his comments would be inappropriate even if they had some basis, they were even worse because Judge Boasberg had no basis — the Trump administration has always complied with all court orders,” the DOJ wrote. “Nor did Judge Boasberg identify any purported violations of court orders to justify his unprecedented predictions.”
The department highlighted Boasberg’s conduct during the proceedings in J.G.G. v. Trump, the emergency lawsuit challenging Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport 137 immigrants accused of being Tren de Aragua gang members without evidence.
The DOJ wrote that Boasberg had acted on his preconceived notion after an emergency Saturday hearing in March where he issued a temporary restraining order barring the removal of any immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act beyond the 137 already deported. The Supreme Court has since vacated the decision on jurisdictional grounds.
After the high court ruled that suits challenging such removals must be filed as habeas corpus actions in the federal district where an immigrant was last held, Boasberg found probable cause in April that the government could be held in criminal contempt for intentionally flouting his orders to return two planeloads of migrants.
Both planes had left in the middle of the emergency hearing, while Justice Department attorney Drew Ensign professed ignorance as to the status of the flights during the hearing, even after an hourlong break where Boasberg instructed Ensign to call his superiors and ascertain the flights’ status.
Boasberg’s probable cause finding is still pending before the D.C. Circuit, although it is unlikely to continue toward actual contempt proceedings following the return of 252 immigrants from the infamous mega-prison CECOT.
In Boasberg’s probable cause finding, he noted the Trump administration could “purge” any possible contempt by facilitating the return of the migrants — at the time, the Trump administration had repeatedly claimed El Salvador held custody of the men, until the Salvadoran government said otherwise to the United Nations.
The DOJ also wrote that Boasberg had repeatedly rushed the Justice Department throughout the proceedings, sometimes giving the government less than 48 hours to respond, threatening the criminal-contempt proceedings and the appointment of an outside prosecutor against senior Trump officials.
“Taken together, Judge Boasberg’s words and deeds violate Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, 1, 2(A) and 3 (A)(6), erode public confidence in judicial neutrality and warrant a formal investigation under Rule 11,” the DOJ wrote.
The complaint was filed in the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia and addressed to Chief U.S. District Judge Sri Srinivasan.
The Justice Department asked Srinivasan, an Obama appointee, to create a special investigative committee to determine whether Boasberg’s conduct amounts to “conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts.”
Further, it asked that Boasberg be taken off J.G.G. v. Trump and the case be reassigned, and take appropriate disciplinary action, including a public reprimand and referral to the Judicial Conference for impeachment-related recommendations.
This is the second instance of the Justice Department filing a misconduct complaint against a judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
The DOJ claimed in February that U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes had engaged in “hostile and egregious misconduct” against the Trump administration during the proceedings of Talbott v. Trump, a case challenging the president’s ban on transgender individuals serving in the military.
Reyes, a Joe Biden appointee, is well known for her blunt approach to oral arguments, regularly grilling attorneys of either party in a punchier manner than many of her colleagues while still maintaining an atmosphere of respect.
The Justice Department’s complaint is still under review.
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
