Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Government Accountability Office found Trump's funding cancellation unconstitutional — The Government Accountability Office sent a letter to congressional leaders on September 29 stating that Trump's cancellation of $810 million in federal funding, primarily for Health and Human Services programs serving refugees and asylum seekers, violated the Constitution. Trump used the "pocket rescission" process to bypass Congress, ensuring the funds would go unspent before the end of the fiscal year.

Supporting reports

• Trump signs bipartisan DHS funding bill, ending 75-day shutdown — President Trump signed bipartisan legislation on Thursday ending a 75-day shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, the longest agency shutdown in U.S. history. The Republican-controlled House approved the measure in a swift voice vote, funding much of DHS including the Secret Service and TSA, but explicitly excluding immigration enforcement agencies (ICE and CBP). The White House had warned that emergency funds were nearly exhausted and that staffing shortages threatened airport operations. A separate $70 billion immigration enforcement budget was advanced through a Republican-only reconciliation process.
• Became Law: Homeland Security and Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act, 2026 — Congress passed and the President signed H.R. 7147, a continuing appropriations measure funding the Department of Homeland Security and related agencies through fiscal 2026. The bill became Public Law 119-86 on April 30, 2026. Continuing resolutions maintain federal operations when regular appropriations bills are not enacted, preserving agency funding and preventing government shutdowns.
• US Congress passes 45-day extension of FISA Section 702 warrantless surveillance authority — The US House of Representatives voted to extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act for 45 days, avoiding a statutory lapse at midnight on April 30. The extension follows a 10-day stopgap passed earlier in April. Republican Speaker Mike Johnson refused to include substantive reforms demanded by progressive Democrats and hardline Republicans, particularly a warrant requirement for surveilling Americans' communications. Privacy advocates and reform-minded lawmakers criticized the decision as circumventing democratic process and constitutional protections.
• House Republicans ended 76-day Department of Homeland Security shutdown — After a 76-day shutdown, House Republicans passed a Senate measure to fund the Department of Homeland Security while withholding funds from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection. The Senate had passed the bill unanimously on March 27, but Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) refused to take it up until April 30 because it aligned with Democratic priorities.
• House Passes Partial DHS Funding Bill — The U.S. House of Representatives passed a partial funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), likely ending the longest partial government shutdown in U.S. history. This legislative action aims to restore funding and operations for DHS, impacting national security and federal employees.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge allows DHS to require week's notice for congressional ICE facility inspections — A federal judge in Washington DC ruled that the Department of Homeland Security can require lawmakers to provide one week's advance notice before inspecting immigration detention facilities. The ruling came despite the same judge blocking an identical policy in December, but the administration claimed it was now enforcing the requirement using different funding. The decision allows the Trump administration to continue restricting congressional oversight of ICE operations while separate litigation proceeds over aggressive federal enforcement actions in Minnesota.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge orders release of Kilmar Ábrego García from ICE custody; DHS vows appeal — U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland ordered the release of Kilmar Ábrego García from an immigration detention facility in Pennsylvania on Thursday, December 11, 2025, finding that the federal government lacked lawful authority to detain him without a final deportation order. Ábrego, a Salvadoran national and construction worker, was freed shortly before 5pm ET. The Department of Homeland Security immediately condemned the ruling as "naked judicial activism" and announced plans to appeal. Ábrego plans to return to Maryland, where he has lived with his U.S. citizen wife and child.
• Judge Xinis ruled ICE could not hold Ábrego García without final deportation order — On Thursday, December 12, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ruled that ICE could not hold Kilmar Ábrego García because there was no final deportation order for him, noting that the judge had not ordered one in the original 2019 decision protecting him from deportation.

Supporting reports

• DOJ claimed ICE no longer required to accommodate congressional oversight visits — Politico reported that Justice Department lawyers said in court that ICE is no longer required to accommodate oversight visits from lawmakers to its facilities, arguing that the requirement was part of government funding laws that expired when the federal government shutdown began in September, and that ICE is now operating with appropriations made in Trump's tax and spending bill, which does not require congressional access to ICE facilities.
• Congress denied entry to ICE holding facilities for oversight inspections — According to a lawsuit filed in Washington DC, members of Congress have been denied entry to ICE field offices in New York City, Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and Washington for congressionally mandated oversight inspections of holding facilities. ICE claims these are not traditional detention centers and therefore not subject to congressional inspection. Additionally, the government shutdown has been cited by the Trump administration to override oversight rules preventing congressional inspection of holding and detention centers.
• ICE claims shutdown eliminates congressional oversight obligation — Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) asserted that the government shutdown eliminates its legal obligation to permit congressional oversight visits to its detention facilities. This claim emerged despite ICE receiving an injection of $75 billion into its budget from July's budget reconciliation bill, allowing law enforcement agents to continue receiving paychecks including overtime. The assertion represents a unilateral claim of exemption from congressional oversight authority during the shutdown.
• ICE Claims Shutdown Limits Congressional Oversight — On October 28, 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced that the government shutdown means it no longer has a legal obligation to allow congressional oversight visits to its detention facilities. This statement raises concerns about transparency and accountability within the agency during the shutdown.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge orders removal of fence blocking public street at ICE facility — A federal judge ordered ICE to remove an 8-foot-tall fence installed outside the Broadview ICE facility after the village of Broadview challenged it as illegally blocking a public street. The ruling came late Thursday in response to local government objections to the obstruction of public access.
• Democratic senators denied access to ICE detention facility in Illinois — U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth visited an ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois on Friday, requesting a tour and attempting to deliver supplies to protesters, but were barred from entering. Both senators invoked their congressional oversight authority and expressed concern about undisclosed conditions inside the facility. Durbin stated he had never experienced such "stonewalling" from a presidential administration in his tenure.

Supporting reports

• US Supreme Court allows deportation of eight men to South Sudan without torture-risk review — The US Supreme Court issued an order on Thursday allowing the Trump administration to deport eight men held at Camp Lemonnier (a US military base in Djibouti) to South Sudan, reversing a district judge's ruling that required immigrants facing third-country deportation to first demonstrate reasonable fear of torture, persecution, or death. Most men are from Vietnam, South Korea, Mexico, Laos, Cuba, and Myanmar—only one from South Sudan. The conservative majority's decision follows a prior ruling permitting rapid deportations to unconnected countries without such protections.
• US judge clears path for deportation of eight immigrants to South Sudan — A US district judge in Boston denied emergency requests by eight immigrants to halt their deportation to South Sudan, clearing the way for their transfer after the Supreme Court clarified that the judge could no longer block the action. The men, convicted of serious crimes and from countries including Vietnam, South Korea, Mexico, Laos, Cuba, and Myanmar, were scheduled to be flown to South Sudan on Friday evening. The case represents the latest round in litigation over the Trump administration's campaign to deter immigration through high-profile deportations to countries where migrants report safety concerns.

Supporting reports

• Stephen Miller disclosed Palantir stock holdings — News broke that White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, widely believed to be responsible for the administration's draconian immigration policies, owns between $100,000 and $250,000 worth of stock in Palantir, the data and intelligence software company owned by Peter Thiel. Palantir has valuable contracts with ICE to track undocumented immigrants.
• Conflict-of-interest disclosures for new ACIP members not published in writing before meeting — The eight newly appointed ACIP members were asked to verbally disclose conflicts of interest at the meeting, but it is unclear whether written conflict-of-interest disclosures were published in advance. The new members did not appear on the Trump administration's conflict-of-interest tracker for ACIP members as of Wednesday morning. An HHS spokesperson stated ethics reviews had been conducted but did not clarify when or where disclosures would be published. One member dropped out Tuesday evening after a government financial review.
• Trump celebrates Supreme Court ruling as vindication of executive power expansion — President Trump declared the Supreme Court's decision a "giant win" and stated that the ruling would allow his administration to "promptly file to proceed with numerous policies that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis." Trump framed the decision as freeing the executive from judicial constraints, signaling intent to enforce previously blocked policies across all states without nationwide court protection.
• Supreme Court limits lower courts' power to block federal executive orders via nationwide injunctions — The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Trump v Casa Inc ending the practice of lower courts issuing nationwide injunctions to block federal executive orders. The ruling prevents judges from halting or slowing presidential orders before their constitutionality is tested, including Trump's executive order attempting to remove birthright citizenship protections. Liberal justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Brown Jackson dissented, warning the decision undermines the rule of law and shifts the burden of defending constitutional rights onto individuals.
• Supreme Court restricts courts' ability to issue nationwide injunctions against executive orders — The Supreme Court issued a decision significantly limiting lower courts' ability to issue nationwide injunctions against presidential policies. The ruling fundamentally reshaped how opponents can challenge executive overreach. Previously, courts had issued approximately 35 nationwide injunctions against Trump administration actions during the first six months of his second term. The decision leaves narrow exceptions, such as when a judge determines nationwide relief is necessary to protect plaintiffs from irreparable harm, as in the birthright citizenship case.
• US Supreme Court limits nationwide injunctions, restricting federal judges' power to block Trump orders — The US Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that federal district judges cannot issue nationwide injunctions blocking presidential policies; instead, court orders apply only to specific plaintiffs who sue. The decision arose from Trump's executive order banning birthright citizenship. While the ruling did not immediately implement the birthright citizenship ban, it fundamentally shifts judicial oversight by preventing courts from protecting all Americans from allegedly unconstitutional policies. The policy cannot take effect for 30 days. Immigration advocates are refiling lawsuits as class actions to seek broader protections.
• Supreme Court limits nationwide injunctions in Trump v. CASA — The Supreme Court decided Trump v. CASA, restricting the power of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions. The ruling was announced on June 27, 2025. President Trump immediately claimed the decision as a major victory that would enable him to end birthright citizenship by executive action, citing a fabricated historical narrative about the Fourteenth Amendment and the Civil War.
• SCOTUS ruled on nationwide injunctions and birthright citizenship executive order — The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that nationwide injunctions likely exceed congressional authority, narrowing the scope of injunctions that had blocked Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship. The ruling left underlying injunctions in place for named plaintiffs but created uncertainty about nationwide relief. A class-action lawsuit was immediately filed after the ruling to seek broader protection.
• Supreme Court Grants Partial Stay in Trump v. CASA — The Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in the case of Trump v. CASA, which was consolidated with Trump v. New Jersey and Trump v. Washington. The Court partially stayed the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The lower courts had issued universal injunctions blocking the enforcement of Executive Order 14160, which directed federal agencies to deny birthright citizenship to certain children of non-citizen parents. The Supreme Court held that the lower courts likely exceeded their equitable authority by issuing nationwide injunctions and limited the injunctions to the named plaintiffs only. The ruling narrows the use of nationwide injunctions but did not address the constitutionality of the Executive Order or the question of birthright citizenship.
• White House issues fact sheet celebrating Supreme Court decision limiting nationwide injunctions — The White House issued a fact sheet on June 27, 2025, celebrating a Supreme Court decision that restricts the use of nationwide injunctions against executive actions. The document states that the ruling "restores the proper separation of powers" and claims that 35 of 40 nationwide injunctions filed against Trump's second-term executive actions originated from five jurisdictions (California, Maryland, Massachusetts, Washington, and D.C.). The fact sheet lists pending policy actions it states can now proceed, including ending birthright citizenship, ceasing sanctuary city funding, suspending refugee resettlement, and other measures.
• Supreme Court releases opinion in Trump v. CASA, Inc. (24A884) — The Supreme Court released an official slip opinion in Trump v. CASA, Inc. Docket number(s): 24A884.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration sued federal judges in Maryland over deportation order — On June 24, the Trump administration sued every federal judge in Maryland, challenging an order blocking them from immediately deporting any immigrant in the state who is challenging their removal through a habeas petition. The administration is arguing that the pause violates a Supreme Court ruling.
• Department of Justice files complaint against U.S. District Court of Maryland over automatic immigration injunctions — The Department of Justice announced filing a complaint against the U.S. District Court of Maryland, challenging a "Standing Order" that automatically issues injunctions against federal immigration enforcement actions. The court's order requires automatic injunctions for habeas petitions filed by detained aliens in Maryland. DOJ argues the order violates procedural requirements, congressional intent, and Supreme Court precedent. Attorney General Pamela Bondi characterized the order as judicial overreach undermining executive authority and the democratic process.
• Trump DOJ sues Maryland federal judiciary over deportation stay order — The Trump Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the entire bench of Maryland federal judges, challenging an order issued by Chief Judge George Russell that bars deportation of undocumented immigrants for at least one day after they file legal challenges to their detention. The DOJ characterized the judicial order as "unlawful" and an improper use of equitable powers. The lawsuit specifically names Judge Paula Xinis, who is overseeing a high-profile case involving Salvadoran national Kilmar Ábrego García and considering sanctions against government officials for refusing to facilitate his release.

Supporting reports

• US Supreme Court stays judicial order blocking third-country deportations — The US Supreme Court's conservative majority issued an unsigned order on Monday pausing a federal judge's ruling that required immigrants facing deportation to third countries to receive notice and a meaningful opportunity to contest removal. The stay allows the Trump administration to resume deporting migrants to nations they are not citizens of, including conflict-ridden places like South Sudan. The decision overturned a May ruling by Boston-based Judge Brian Murphy, who had blocked the deportation of eight men to South Sudan after finding the administration violated due process rights.
• U.S. Supreme Court granted Trump administration authority to deport migrants to third countries — On June 23, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the Trump administration's request to deport migrants to countries other than their country of origin, including nations plagued by violence, without additional legal process beyond an initial removal hearing and without regard to conditions migrants may face in those countries. The court majority did not explain its reasoning. Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor dissented sharply. Legal analyst Steve Vladeck noted the ruling expands prior decisions that had already cleared the way for treating up to one million migrants as removable.
• Case update — D.V.D. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (D. Mass.) 1:25-cv-10676 — The Supreme Court stopped a lower court's order which has prevented the administration from removing immigrants to third countries without an opportunity to present their claims of potential torture first. The Supreme Court's order is now in place while the litigation proceeds. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented.
• Supreme Court Grants Stay in Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D. — The Supreme Court granted the Department of Homeland Security's emergency application for a stay in the case of Department of Homeland Security, Applicants v. D.V.D., et al. This decision allows the federal government to proceed with its actions that were previously blocked by a lower court order. The case involved immigration enforcement actions challenged by the respondents, and the stay permits the continuation of these actions pending further litigation. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the decision.
• Supreme Court allowed Trump administration to deport migrants to third countries — On June 23, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to allow the Trump administration to move forward with sending migrants to countries other than their own, temporarily overturning a lower court ruling that prevented the deportations until migrants could challenge them in court. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin posted on Twitter, "Fire up the deportation planes."

Supporting reports

• Congressional Representatives Denied Access to Detainees — Representatives Jimmy Gomez, Luz Rivas, Norma Torres, and Lou Correa were denied access to check on detainees arrested during federal raids in Los Angeles. The representatives were turned away by a federal agent despite federal law allowing members of Congress to conduct oversight visits. The detainees reportedly lacked access to food, water, and medicine, raising concerns about their treatment and rights.
• Democratic lawmakers denied entry to detention centers in LA and New York — Over the weekend, Democratic members of Congress from California and New York were denied entry to federal detention facilities in Los Angeles and New York City. The lawmakers, including Maxine Waters, Jimmy Gomez, and Norma Torres, sought to inspect conditions and check on individuals detained during recent immigration raids and protests. The Department of Homeland Security stated that the lawmakers were turned away for safety reasons, citing large numbers of rioters. The lawmakers argued that their congressional roles entitled them to conduct oversight of the detention conditions and the welfare of detainees.
• Members of Congress Barred from ICE Detention Facilities — Five members of Congress reported being barred from entering ICE detention facilities to conduct oversight, despite having legal authority to do so. This included attempts by representatives from New York and California to check on the well-being of detainees.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration orders mass layoffs at Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — The Trump administration, through staff from Elon Musk's "Department of Government Efficiency," issued reduction-in-force letters terminating approximately 1,500 of the CFPB's 1,700 employees on April 17. The layoffs eliminated entire divisions including the office of servicemember affairs, office of older Americans, and office of fair lending. According to an employee declaration, the effort was managed by Gavin Kliger and staff were kept working 36 hours straight to ensure notices went out. Employees raised concerns about violations of court orders requiring "particularized assessment," but were told "all that mattered was the numbers."
• Federal judge bars Trump administration from rapid deportation policy — Federal Judge Brian Murphy on Friday barred the Trump administration from implementing a new policy that would allow it to rapidly deport hundreds or thousands of immigrants to countries other than their own without giving them an opportunity to demonstrate they face persecution, torture, or death. The ruling blocks a policy that would circumvent due process protections for asylum seekers and vulnerable migrants.
• Federal judge blocks mass layoffs at Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued a ruling blocking the Trump administration's termination of approximately 1,500 of the CFPB's 1,700 employees, announced on Thursday via reduction-in-force letters. The layoffs, orchestrated by staff from Elon Musk's "Department of Government Efficiency," eliminated entire divisions including servicemember affairs, older Americans, and fair lending offices. The judge's order came after a federal appeals court had modified (but not eliminated) an earlier injunction limiting the agency's ability to terminate staff. The administration's compliance with the ruling remains unclear.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge finds probable cause for contempt charges against Trump officials over Alien Enemies Act deportations — Chief US District Judge James Boasberg issued a 46-page opinion finding probable cause to hold Trump administration officials in criminal contempt for violating his temporary injunction blocking deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. The administration failed to recall deportation flights that had already departed, claiming the verbal order was not binding and that planes outside US airspace were beyond judicial jurisdiction. Boasberg rejected these defenses, warned of appointing an independent prosecutor if the White House stonewalled contempt proceedings, and ordered officials to either return the deported individuals or face contempt charges.
• Federal judge finds Trump administration in criminal contempt for defying court order — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued an opinion finding that the Trump administration's "hurried removal" of men to El Salvador after Boasberg had issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) prohibiting such removal demonstrated "a wilful disregard for its Order, sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt." Boasberg quoted Chief Justice John Marshall, stating the Constitution does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders by coordinate branches. Boasberg indicated he will use declarations, hearings, or depositions to identify responsible individuals, and if the government refuses to prosecute, he will appoint a private prosecutor.
• Appeal filed — J.G.G. v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00766 — Judge Boasberg issued an order holding that there's probable cause to find the Defendants acted with criminal contempt in violating his orders. He offered the government to stave off a criminal referral by “purging” the contempt. He wrote, “The most obvious way for Defendants to do so here is by asserting custody of the individuals who were removed in violation of the Court's classwide TRO so that they might avail themselves of their right to challenge their removability through a habeas proceeding.” The defendants appealed his decision to the D.C.Circuit. On the same day, the Plaintiffs submitted a new motion for a TRO asking the court to direct the government to provide 30 days' notice before seeking to remove any class member under the AEA. The Plaintiffs also stated that they intend to amend their complaint “to reinstate their habeas claim on behalf of class members detained in CECOT and to seek the return of these Plaintiffs to the United States.”
• Judge Issues Contempt Ruling Against Trump Administration — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled that the Trump administration's removal of detainees to El Salvador, despite a temporary restraining order, demonstrated willful disregard for judicial authority. The judge indicated that if the government does not rectify its contempt, he would pursue prosecution against those responsible for ignoring the court's order.
• Judge Boasberg issues 46-page opinion finding probable cause of criminal contempt — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued a scathing 46-page opinion finding probable cause that Trump administration officials acted in criminal contempt of his order to recall deportation flights containing alleged Venezuelan gang members. The opinion represents a judicial escalation in response to the administration's apparent willingness to violate court orders and test the limits of the legal system.
• Case update — J.G.G. v. Trump (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00766 — The D.C. Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, issued an administrative stay in the appeal from Judge Boasberg's April 16 contempt-related order.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge rebukes Trump administration for defying Supreme Court order to return wrongly deported man — US District Judge Paula Xinis sharply rebuked Trump administration officials on Tuesday for taking no steps to secure the return of Kilmar Ábrego García, who was wrongly deported to El Salvador despite a Supreme Court order to "facilitate" his return. The judge rejected the administration's narrow reading of the order and its claim of powerlessness. She ordered the administration to produce details under oath within two weeks about its efforts to return Ábrego García, and authorized depositions of up to six officials including ICE and DHS leadership.
• Federal judge launched two-week inquiry into Trump administration's refusal to return Abrego Garcia — A federal judge launched a two-week inquiry into the Trump administration's refusal to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia to the US, saying "nothing has been done" to do so. The inquiry represents judicial investigation into potential contempt of court.
• Judge Boasberg issues 46-page opinion finding probable cause of criminal contempt — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued a scathing 46-page opinion finding probable cause that Trump administration officials acted in criminal contempt of his order to recall deportation flights containing alleged Venezuelan gang members. The opinion represents a judicial escalation in response to the administration's apparent willingness to violate court orders and test the limits of the legal system.
• Judge Xinis opens investigation and rebukes administration for non-compliance — U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis rebuked the Trump administration for doing "nothing" to secure the release of Kilmar Ábrego García as ordered by the Supreme Court. Xinis ordered the administration to answer written questions and provide depositions about steps taken to comply with the Supreme Court order, opening a formal investigation into potential deliberate flouting of the decree.

Supporting reports

• Judge Paula Xinis scheduled hearing in Abrego Garcia case — U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis set the next hearing in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case for April 15, 2025, at 4:00 p.m., following her April 6 ruling that Abrego Garcia's detention and removal were wholly lawless and constituted a clear constitutional violation.
• U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis held hearing on Kilmar Abrego Garcia case and found no compliance with court order — U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis held a hearing in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man the Trump administration deported to El Salvador's CECOT prison despite a court order to facilitate his return. Judge Xinis stated that "what the record shows is nothing has been done" to comply with her orders. She dismissed the administration's argument that a meeting between President Trump and El Salvador's president Nayib Bukele constituted effort to facilitate Garcia's return. The judge ordered two weeks of fact-finding to determine if the administration is following her orders, permitting Garcia's lawyers to conduct depositions, document requests, and interrogatories.
• Judge Xinis Orders Fact Finding in Abrego Garcia Case — U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis held a hearing regarding the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was deported to El Salvador. The judge ordered a two-week fact-finding period to determine if the Trump administration is in contempt of court for failing to facilitate Garcia's return to the U.S. She dismissed the administration's claims that a recent meeting between President Trump and El Salvador's president was part of the effort to comply with the court's orders. The judge emphasized the ongoing harm caused by Garcia's detention.

Supporting reports

• Court Orders Return of Deportee Amid Legal Controversy — U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the government to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legal U.S. resident who was deported due to an "administrative error." The administration filed an emergency motion to appeal the order, despite the judge's ruling that the deportation was unlawful and a violation of constitutional rights.
• Trump administration filed emergency motion to block return order for Abrego Garcia — Following U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis's order that the government return Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the United States by 11:59 p.m. on April 7, the Trump administration immediately filed an emergency motion to stop the order while it appeals her decision. The motion sought to prevent compliance with the judge's ruling that the deportation was unlawful.
• U.S. District Judge Xinis ordered government to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador — U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the Trump administration to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the United States no later than 11:59 p.m. on April 7. Abrego Garcia was in the United States legally, is married to a U.S. citizen, and is the father of a U.S. citizen. In 2019, a court barred the government from deporting him to El Salvador. On March 31, an ICE official told the court under oath that Abrego Garcia had been arrested and deported to prison in El Salvador because of an "administrative error." The government claimed it could not retrieve him because he is no longer in U.S. jurisdiction. In her April 7 opinion, Judge Xinis stated that "there were no legal grounds whatsoever for his arrest, detention, or removal" and that his detention "appears wholly lawless" and constitutes "a clear constitutional violation." She criticized administration officials for asserting "they can forcibly remove any person—migrant and U.S. citizen alike—to prisons outside the United States, and then baldly assert they have no way to effectuate return because they are no longer the 'custodian.'"
• Judge Paula Xinis orders daily compliance updates and depositions after Trump administration ignores court orders on wrongful deportation case — US District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the Trump administration to provide daily updates on efforts to comply with her April 10 order to facilitate the return of Kilmar Ábrego García, who was wrongly deported to El Salvador. After the government made clear it was doing nothing to comply, Xinis ordered government officials to respond to written questions and sit for depositions. Lawyers reported on Tuesday that the government was ignoring that order as well. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the administration's request to halt Xinis's rulings.
• Federal judge ordered government to file status update on Abrego Garcia by 9:30 a.m. — U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis ordered the government to file an update by 9:30 a.m. on April 11 explaining where Kilmar Abrego Garcia is, what the government is doing to get him back, and what additional steps it will take. She scheduled an in-person hearing for 1:00 p.m. The government responded that the judge had not given them enough time to answer and suggested it would delay, citing the Supreme Court's instruction that the judge show deference to the president's foreign affairs authority.
• Government attorney stated lack of knowledge about Abrego Garcia's location and no action taken — At the 1:00 p.m. hearing before Judge Paula Xinis, the government's attorney, Drew Ensign, stated that he did not have information about where Kilmar Abrego Garcia is and that the government had done nothing to get him back. Ensign said he might have answers by the following Tuesday. Judge Xinis ordered the government to provide an update by the next day. The government's filing at 12:15 p.m. had claimed Abrego Garcia is "in the custody of a foreign sovereign," but the attorney's testimony contradicted any claim of active efforts to secure his return.
• Government fails to comply with court order regarding Abrego Garcia — Following the Supreme Court's order, the government failed to provide information about Kilmar Abrego Garcia's whereabouts and did not take steps to facilitate his return, raising concerns about compliance with judicial directives.
• Government lawyer claims lack of information and ignores court order — On April 11, 2025, the lawyer representing the government, Drew Ensign, told the court that he did not have information about where Kilmar Abrego Garcia is located and ignored Judge Xinis's order to provide information about what steps the government was taking to bring him back. This non-compliance occurred despite the Supreme Court's April 10 decision requiring the government to facilitate his release and to share information about steps taken.
• Trump administration defies court order on wrongly deported Maryland resident — A federal judge in Maryland admonished Trump administration lawyers for failing to comply with a court order requiring details on the whereabouts and status of Kilmar Ábrego García, a Maryland resident with a valid US work permit who was wrongly deported to El Salvador on March 15. The US Supreme Court had upheld the judge's order for his return, but the administration claimed it needed more time and that foreign affairs considerations made compliance impracticable. The judge demanded daily updates and expressed frustration at the government's lack of concrete action.

Supporting reports

• Judge Boasberg opens inquiry into whether White House violated court order on deportations — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg opened an inquiry into whether the Trump administration violated his temporary restraining order halting deportations under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The administration failed to recall two deportation flights, claiming the judge's verbal order lacked a written counterpart and therefore could be disregarded. Boasberg questioned this reasoning at a hearing, stating the administration's argument was "one heck of a stretch." The administration has insisted it did not violate the order but has adopted a combative stance toward the judge and is considering invoking the rarely used state secrets privilege to stonewall further inquiry.
• Trump administration defies court order in Venezuelan deportations — The Trump administration deported 137 Venezuelan migrants on Sunday despite a federal judge's verbal order to halt deportations. Administration officials, including border czar Tom Homan and Attorney General Pam Bondi, defended the deportations under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act (a wartime law), claiming the migrants were gang members committing violent crimes. Homan stated he does not care what judges think regarding the case, signaling defiance of judicial authority and court orders.
• Trump administration ignores federal court order on deportation flights — The Trump administration defied a US district court order from Judge James Boasberg directing the administration to turn around planes carrying deportees. Thomas Homan, Trump's deportation enforcement official, stated "I don't care what the judges think" in a Fox News interview. Trump subsequently called for Boasberg's impeachment, labeling him a "radical left lunatic." The defiance prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare public rebuke, stating that impeachment is not an appropriate response to judicial disagreement.
• Federal court blocks Trump administration's use of Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants without hearings — Judge James Boasberg rejected the Trump administration's attempt to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelan migrants accused of gang ties without due process hearings. The administration had issued a proclamation on March 15 claiming Tren de Aragua gang activities constituted an "invasion" justifying wartime deportation powers. Boasberg ruled that individuals must receive hearings before removal and that plaintiffs disputing gang membership cannot be deported until courts decide the merits. The case proceeded to appeals court, where Judge Patricia Millett questioned whether Venezuelans received adequate opportunity to contest accusations before deportation.

Supporting reports

• Judge blocks Trump from using Alien Enemies Act for deportations — A federal judge, James Boasberg, issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport five Venezuelan nationals. The administration had invoked the act, claiming the Venezuelans were part of the Tren de Aragua gang, designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. The judge's decision came in response to a lawsuit by the ACLU and Democracy Forward, arguing the act was unlawfully invoked during peacetime. The restraining order prevents deportations for 14 days, maintaining the status quo until a hearing is set.
• U.S. District Judge blocks deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued an order temporarily blocking the Trump administration's deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members. The ruling was based on the lack of hearings for the individuals to present evidence against their alleged gang affiliation. The administration had invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to justify the deportations without due process.
• Judge Boasberg issued temporary restraining order blocking Alien Enemies Act deportations — US District Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting the Trump administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport migrants and ordered planes carrying migrants out of the country to immediately turn around. The administration defied the order, with three planes landing in El Salvador and more than 135 migrants deported.
• Judge halts deportation under Alien Enemies Act — A federal judge, James Boasberg, issued an immediate halt to the deportation of five Venezuelan nationals, blocking the Trump administration's attempt to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The administration had invoked this wartime law, claiming the Venezuelans were part of a gang conducting hostile actions against the U.S. The judge's order required any planes already in the air to be turned around. This decision came in response to a lawsuit by civil liberties organizations arguing the act's misuse during peacetime.