The Trump administration last week filed a lawsuit against all 15 federal judges in Maryland over an order blocking the immediate deportation of migrants challenging their removals, ratcheting up a fight with the federal judiciary over President Donald Trump鈥檚 executive powers.
On Wednesday, Thomas Cullen, a federal judge in 色多多, was assigned to hear the case.
The remarkable action lays bare the administration鈥檚 determination to exert its will over immigration enforcement as well as a growing exasperation with federal judges who have time and again turned aside executive branch actions they see as lawless and without legal merit.
鈥淚t鈥檚 extraordinary,鈥 Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School, said of the Justice Department鈥檚 lawsuit. 鈥淎nd it鈥檚 escalating DOJ鈥檚 effort to challenge federal judges.鈥
People are also reading…
At issue is an order signed by Chief Judge George L. Russell III and filed in May blocking the administration from immediately removing from the U.S. any immigrants who file paperwork with the Maryland district court seeking a review of their detention. The order blocks the removal until 4 p.m. on the second business day after the habeas corpus petition is filed.
The administration says the automatic pause on removals violates a Supreme Court ruling and impedes the president鈥檚 authority to enforce immigration laws.
The Republican administration has been locked for weeks in a growing showdown with the federal judiciary amid a barrage of legal challenges to the president鈥檚 efforts to carry out key priorities around immigration and other matters. The Justice Department has grown increasingly frustrated by rulings blocking the president鈥檚 agenda, accusing judges of improperly impeding the president鈥檚 powers.
鈥淧resident Trump鈥檚 executive authority has been undermined since the first hours of his presidency by an endless barrage of injunctions designed to halt his agenda,鈥 Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement after the lawsuit was filed.
鈥淭he American people elected President Trump to carry out his policy agenda: this pattern of judicial overreach undermines the democratic process and cannot be allowed to stand,鈥 Bondi said.
A spokesman for the Maryland district court declined to comment.
The Trump administration asked the state鈥檚 federal judges to recuse themselves from the case, saying it should be referred to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for assignment of a randomly selected judge from another district.
In a June 26 order, Russell wrote that he was referring the motion to the chief judge of the Fourth Circuit 鈥渇or the action he deems appropriate in the circumstances.鈥
A brief entry dated Wednesday says the case was reassigned to Cullen. A former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, Cullen became a federal judge in 2020 after he was nominated by Trump and confirmed by the Senate.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, said Friday that he doubts the case will be transferred to 色多多. Because the dispute is mostly about legal issues, he said it would likely be resolved through briefs and a written opinion.
However, oral arguments could be heard in 色多多 or by remote means such as Zoom or a telephone conference, he said.
Tobias said Cullen has earned an 鈥渆xcellent reputation鈥 鈥 first as the prosecutor of white supremacists charged in the violent 鈥淯nite the Right鈥 rally in Charlottesville, and later as a 鈥渞igorous and fair鈥 district judge.
鈥淚 think that Judge Cullen will carefully, rigorously and fairly resolve this interbranch substantive and procedural dispute,鈥 Tobias wrote in an email.
During his confirmation process, Cullen stated that he would 鈥渇ulfill his oath without fear or favor鈥 when deciding cases, and that 鈥渃ourts鈥 independence is fundamental to our rule of law.鈥
Those statements, and his tenure on the bench since then, 鈥渟how that Trump鈥檚 appointment of him as U.S. Attorney and District Judge will be irrelevant to Cullen鈥檚 resolution of this case,鈥 Tobias wrote.
Cullen鈥檚 appointment 鈥渟eems to be the most high-profile case that he has been assigned, as it could have national implications for the continuing conflicts between the federal judiciary and the executive branch,鈥 the law professor said.
Trump has railed against unfavorable judicial rulings, and in one case called for the impeachment of a federal judge in Washington who ordered planeloads of deported immigrants to be turned around.
That led to an extraordinary statement from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who said 鈥渋mpeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.鈥
Among the judges named in the lawsuit is Paula Xinis, who has called the administration鈥檚 deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to El Salvador illegal. Attorneys for Abrego Garcia have asked Xinis to impose fines against the administration for contempt, arguing that it ignored court orders for weeks to return him to the U.S.
The order signed by Russell says it aims to maintain existing conditions and the potential jurisdiction of the court, ensure immigrant petitioners are able to participate in court proceedings and access attorneys and give the government 鈥渇ulsome opportunity to brief and present arguments in its defense.鈥
In an amended order, Russell said the court had received an influx of habeas petitions after hours that 鈥渞esulted in hurried and frustrating hearings in that obtaining clear and concrete information about the location and status of the petitioners is elusive.鈥
James Sample, a constitutional law professor at Hofstra University, described the lawsuit as further part of the erosion of legal norms by the administration. Normally when parties are on the losing side of an injunction, they appeal the order 鈥 not sue the court or judges, he said.
On one hand, he said, the Justice Department has a point that injunctions should be considered extraordinary relief; it鈥檚 unusual for them to be granted automatically in an entire class of cases. But, he added, it鈥檚 the administration鈥檚 own actions in repeatedly moving detainees to prevent them from obtaining writs of habeas corpus that prompted the court to issue the order.
鈥淭he judges here didn鈥檛 ask to be put in this unenviable position,鈥 Sample said. 鈥淔aced with imperfect options, they have made an entirely reasonable, cautious choice to modestly check an executive branch that is determined to circumvent any semblance of impartial process.鈥
色多多 staff writer Laurence Hammack contributed to this report.
