Trump's DOJ sues federal court trying to block deportations

President Trump’s Justice Department took the unusual step Wednesday of suing an entire federal court, saying the judges in Maryland are bending over backward to give a break to illegal immigrants facing deportations.

All 15 active judges in the U.S. District Court in Maryland, as well as the clerk’s office, are named as defendants. At issue is a policy that Chief Judge George Russell III created last month, which grants a short-term automatic stay of deportation to any migrant who files a habeas petition challenging their detention and potential deportation.

The Justice Department called that an “unlawful” order that injects trial courts deeply into deportation matters that are supposed to be left to the administration.

Attorney General Pam Bondi cast the court’s policy as part of a wall of resistance from federal judges stretching the law to stop Mr. Trump.

“The 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,” she said.

The court, through its clerk’s office, declined to comment.

It’s not clear how the case will play out. Given that every judge is named as a defendant, it’s unlikely any of them would be able to hear the case.

Federal district courts are supposed to play only a limited role in deportation cases, which are largely left to the specialized immigration courts within the Justice Department. Appeals of those decisions generally go directly to the federal circuit courts of appeals.

But district judges — particularly ones appointed by Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden — have been asserting a role in deportations.

Judge Paula Xinis, one of the judges in Maryland, is the one who ordered Kilmar Abrego Garcia to be un-deported.

“I don’t think it’s coincidental this came out of the same court that attempted to have Abrego Garcia brought back,” said Andrew “Art” Arthur, a former immigration judge and longtime Capitol Hill immigration staffer.

The Maryland court has become a key forum for liberal-leaning plaintiffs against Mr. Trump, and for good reason. Of the 15 active judges and senior judges, 13 were appointed by Democratic presidents.

The Times’ database of legal challenges to Trump actions shows 18 cases that have reached substantive rulings, with the president prevailing or possibly winning in just five of them.

Under the standing order, a migrant who files a habeas petition challenging his detention and potential deportation is granted an automatic stay of removal until at least 4 p.m. on the subsequent day.

Mr. Arthur said in order to win injunctive relief, a petitioner is supposed to prove an injury and irreparable harm, and usually the defense is given a chance to respond.

The Maryland court’s order short-circuits that, automatically issuing an injunction without any proof or chance at rebuttal, said Mr. Arthur, who is now with the Center for Immigration Studies.

The Justice Department said the rule has already been abused.

In one case, lawyers for a deportation target filed a habeas case, triggering the automatic stay of deportation, even though the migrant was in Texas at the time — supposedly well beyond the reach of the Maryland court.

The court issued its automatic injunction anyway, the department said.