Survey deportation of the interrogation of the federal judge

the Ministry of Justice He asked Monday a Federal Appeal Court In Washington, DC, to replace the local court judge who supervises a case that challenges the Trump administration Deportation Among hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gangs to El Salvador under wartime Foreign enemies law.

The request, which was killed by the judge, James Boasberg, was a “inappropriate practice of the jurisdiction”, and Bouasberg also conducted a hearing where he pressed the lawyer of the Ministry of Justice on the deportation conditions that took place during the weekend.

The Ministry of Justice earlier on Monday asked Boasberg without the success of the cancellation of that session.

Boasberg asked for an oral order on Saturday from the Ministry of Justice to order the return of any deportation who were still carried by air on the flights that arose in the United States.

In the court file, the Ministry of Justice claimed that “the oral guidance cannot be implemented as a judicial order” and said that he complied with the written Boasberg order, which was issued hours after any other deportations of the Venezuelan.

Assistant Deputy Prosecutor Abhishek Campley told Boasberg on Monday that he was not free to talk about the details of controversial deportation trips in a public court in the US District Court in Washington.

In the same session, Lee Gilrrent, the lawyer of five Venezuelan men who called for a lawsuit against their frightening deportation, told Bazburg that he wanted to be careful in his language, but he said: “There has been a lot of talk in the past two weeks about a constitutional crisis.”

“I think we are very close to that,” said Gilrrent, who argued that two departed trips took off from the United States after Bumsberg’s oral order.

Gilrrent appears to refer to Campley’s refusal to answer the judge’s questions about flights, and to the Trump administration’s argument that deportation under the Law of Foreign Enemies was not subject to a judicial order after flights left the airspace.

“It doesn’t matter if you are in the American airspace,” Bouasberg said during the Monday session.

Kambli replied, “When the planes are in the sky and it is a matter of national security,” before the judge, who asked why the planes did not operate.

Boasberg suggested that the position of the Ministry of Justice was “we do not care, and we will do what we want.”

Boasberg asked if the president Donald Trump It has “additional” forces when the plane crosses international waters.

“I think my fair powers are very clear,” Pasperg said.

The argument of the Ministry of Justice also called that the air -mobile planes cannot revolve when his order was issued as an “extension.”

The judge said that he would issue a written order at a later time showing the answers he wanted to give the Ministry of Justice by midday on Tuesday, “Because it seems, oral orders do not seem to carry a great weight.”

In this arrangement, Boasberg said: “The government must make a notice, which may be closed, if necessary, in part, after: 1) It was removed from the absence of anyone on any trip that leaves the United States after 7:25 pm on March 15, 2025, when the removal was removed, when it was registered, and because it was registered, and after it was registered, and after it was registered, it was diminished, and entered it to. Individuals are currently under advertisement in the United States currently in the American nursery;

“If the government takes a position that it will not provide this information to the court under any circumstances, it must support this situation, including with the classified authorities if necessary,” the matter said.

In its Monday, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Justice, objected to the Colombia County Court, to continue Boasberg in chairing the case, saying that he was holding a public hearing “to address the operational details related to air flights that removed foreigners that were identified as linked to a specific foreign terrorist organization.

“This development escalates the risk of an inappropriate boycott exercise of
The Deputy Prosecutor of the Public Prosecutor wrote that the judiciary and the risks that the provincial court may force the government to reveal sensitive concerns of national security and operational security or face major penalties from the court.

“This court must also reset this case immediately to another local court judge in view of the unusual and very appropriate measures – for example, a certificate of collective action involved members of a foreign terrorist organization designated in less than 18 hours without discovering and there is no briefing from the government – which has been employed in the procedures of the provincial court so far,” wrote the sparkling. “

The Court of Appeal did not rule after the lieutenant request.

Correction: This article has been updated to correct the formulation of the files of the Ministry of Justice Court.