Sponsor Advertisement
DOJ Files Misconduct Complaint Against Chief Judge Boasberg

DOJ Files Misconduct Complaint Against Chief Judge Boasberg

The Department of Justice has filed a complaint alleging misconduct by Chief Judge James Boasberg, accusing him of making improper comments about President Trump and undermining judicial integrity.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has lodged an official misconduct complaint against U.S. District Court Chief Judge James E. Boasberg. The complaint, penned by Attorney General Pam Bondi's Chief of Staff, Chad Mizelle, was directed to Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

In the detailed complaint, Mizelle stated, “The Department of Justice respectfully submits this complaint alleging misconduct by U.S. District Court Chief Judge James E. Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Donald J. Trump to the Chief Justice of the United States and other federal judges that have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.”

The allegations arise amid a high-profile case that Judge Boasberg is overseeing, which involves the deportations of migrants to El Salvador. The case has seen a clash between the DOJ and Boasberg, particularly over his order to turn planes carrying deportees back—a directive the Trump administration did not obey. This action, among others, has drawn public criticism from President Trump.

Fox News reported that the complaint details two incidents of misconduct. On March 11, 2025, Boasberg allegedly attempted to influence Chief Justice John Roberts and about two dozen other federal judges by asserting that the Trump Administration would "disregard rulings of federal courts" and potentially cause "a constitutional crisis." Mizelle argued that Boasberg had "no basis" for these claims and emphasized that the administration "has always complied with all court orders."

Following these events, Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order to prevent the removal of members of the violent Tren de Aragua gang, a decision which the Supreme Court later vacated.

The DOJ contends that Boasberg's actions and statements "violate Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges" and that they "erode public confidence in judicial neutrality." The complaint urges Judge Srinivasan to refer the matter to a special committee to determine if Boasberg's conduct constitutes "conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts" and requests Boasberg's removal from the case to maintain public trust during the investigation.

This is the second official complaint filed by Bondi's DOJ against a federal judge. Previously, in February, the DOJ accused U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes of "misconduct" in a case related to transgender military service bans.

The scrutiny of Boasberg, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2002, intensifies as he handles a class action lawsuit involving former CECOT migrants. Recently, lawyers requested the court to reopen discovery based on new allegations regarding migrant conditions and a prisoner exchange sending migrants from El Salvador to Venezuela.

At a recent hearing, DOJ lawyer Tiberius Davis stated that they would comply with court orders "if it was a lawful order," hinting at plans to appeal. In April, Boasberg ruled that there was "probable cause" to hold the Trump administration in contempt for ignoring his order to return the planes, citing "willful disregard." The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has stayed that ruling pending further action.

Advertisement

The Flipside: Different Perspectives

Progressive View

The Department of Justice's complaint against Chief Judge James Boasberg raises significant concerns about the politicization of legal disputes and the potential for executive overreach. While it is crucial for judges to adhere to ethical standards, it is equally important to recognize the context in which these allegations have emerged. The Trump administration has faced numerous legal challenges, some of which have been related to policies widely viewed as controversial or even unconstitutional by various legal experts.

Judge Boasberg's actions, particularly his decisions regarding the deportations and the temporary restraining order issued to protect migrants, reflect a commitment to upholding due process and the rights of individuals, regardless of their immigration status. These are not merely matters of legal procedure but also of human dignity and international human rights norms.

The complaint against Boasberg could be seen as an attempt to intimidate or silence a member of the judiciary who has taken a stand against policies that many believe to be unjust. It is essential to safeguard the independence of the judiciary and ensure that judges can make decisions based on the law and their conscience without fear of retribution. The integrity of the courts depends on their ability to function without undue influence from the other branches of government.

Conservative View

The recent complaint filed by the Department of Justice against Chief Judge James Boasberg is a necessary step to preserve the sanctity of the judiciary and maintain public trust in its impartiality. The allegations outlined by Attorney General Pam Bondi's office point to a concerning pattern of behavior by Judge Boasberg that suggests a bias against the Trump administration. This bias is not only inappropriate but also dangerous, as it threatens the fundamental principle that the judiciary must remain above the political fray.

The incidents cited by the DOJ, particularly the one where Judge Boasberg is accused of trying to influence other judges against the Trump administration, are clear violations of the Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. Such actions, if proven true, would demonstrate a willful disregard for the ethical standards that govern judicial conduct. It is imperative for the integrity of our legal system that any judge who fails to uphold these standards be held accountable.

Moreover, the administration's record of compliance with court orders is well-documented, contradicting Judge Boasberg's claims of a looming constitutional crisis. It is the duty of the judiciary to interpret the law without prejudice and without inserting personal political views into their rulings. The DOJ's request to have Judge Boasberg removed from the case during the investigation is a justified measure to ensure that justice is administered fairly and without the appearance of partiality.

Common Ground

Both conservative and progressive perspectives agree on the importance of a fair and impartial judiciary. Upholding the rule of law and maintaining the integrity of the legal system are paramount to ensuring justice for all citizens. Regardless of political leanings, there is a shared understanding that judges must adhere to ethical standards and conduct themselves in a manner that promotes public confidence in the judiciary. Any actions taken to address concerns about judicial conduct should be thorough, fair, and respectful of the judicial process and the principle of judicial independence.