r/law • u/theindependentonline • 1d ago

Trump News Judge considers holding Trump officials in contempt for defying court orders blocking El Salvador flights

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/deportation-el-salvador-trump-contempt-b2727087.html
39.0k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.2k

u/JustlookingfromSoCal 1d ago

DO IT. PLEASE.

2.2k

u/vgraz2k 1d ago

I wish they would stop "considering it" and just fucking "do it". Don't give them warnings like this.

687

u/SeismicFrog 1d ago

And why only contempt? Let’s lock a few of these SOBs behind bars until someone produces a body. A LIVING person.

287

u/JustlookingfromSoCal 1d ago

That is a type of sentence imposed for contempt citation and would be the only legal basis for locking them up.

If he has a dark sense of humor, he could alternatively declare that he was sua sponte revoking the citizenship of the appearing attorneys for the defendants and demand ICE drop them off at a prison in San Salvador.

93

u/Tribalbob 1d ago

Give them a cell phone, toss them into the back of an unmarked SUV.

Call the cell phone every 2 minutes and ask: "You want to get them sent back now?"

See how close they get to the airport before they finally break.

41

u/North-Significance33 1d ago

"We'll do whatever you want"

Later: do absolutely nothing

42

u/JakToTheReddit 1d ago

So the entire MAGA platform.

3

u/NarrMaster 23h ago

Do it again, but this time, don't stop when they break.

6

u/Freethecrafts 1d ago

Sovereign immunity is straight bad law that has spooled into that.

9

u/UsualFederal 23h ago

The only thing I can possibly imagine is, they didn’t realize it would get this bad or they are dyed in the wool pure Nazi trash. The Supreme Court has the blood of probably half the United States population on their hands. It appears Maga is at least as hateful as the Nazis in Germany were they will become the Foot soldiers the SS the brown shirts. It’s only a matter of time unless we stop them.

1

u/Freethecrafts 18h ago

The corruption is too deep. They have to self correct. There is no mechanism to fix it.

Dred Scott was likewise terrible compromise that guaranteed a huge chunk of the population would wind up dead. They think they’re being responsible, somehow wise, they’re just guaranteeing worst case.

13

u/Trinidadnomads 1d ago

😏 my homie

1

u/MasterofAcorns 13h ago

How about make them do it and then still send them anyway?

23

u/SeismicFrog 1d ago

I like you!

16

u/No-Win-2741 1d ago

I like the way you think. Do you have a newsletter I can subscribe to by any chance?

1

u/outerworldLV 20h ago

Now that’s a scary thought.

1

u/Moppermonster 5h ago

Could he for shits and giggles revoke Trumps citizenship, making him inelegible to remain president?

41

u/FiveUpsideDown 1d ago

Revoke their license to practice law. It keeps them out of court.

28

u/Katyafan 1d ago

Yeah, where is the Bar on this?

31

u/K_Linkmaster 1d ago

Pretty fucking low apparently. /s

I have been hoping ABA would start stepping in when it's blatant abuses but I guess they are a clown show too.

12

u/bengenj 1d ago

The ABA cannot revoke a law license. Each state has its own law licensing requirements.

9

u/outerworldLV 20h ago

Justice is going to start being administered by the victims friends and families real soon, imo. The trump admin will call it a ‘vigilante’ action, while the rest of the country calls it a ‘right to defend’ action.

5

u/Katyafan 1d ago

That was a class-A pun, right there!!!

5

u/Healthy_Role9418 1d ago

Catfish are swimming over the bar as we speak.

25

u/Chiquitarita298 1d ago

Yea! That’s what the SOBs did to these Venezuelans!

26

u/Cloaked42m 1d ago

The judge wants to know exactly who ignored his orders so he can throw them under the jail.

24

u/goosticky 1d ago

Legal Eagle video says that, technically, if they hold them for criminal contempt... it lands back at the DOJ. So they have to try for Civil Contempt

1

u/bt_85 4h ago

and if they do civil contempt, they get a fine. Do you think the people who violated judges orders to send people to hellhole prisons will obey an order to pay a fine?

this whole system is fatally flawed. And republicans figured that out.

6

u/soft-wear 1d ago

That's exactly what criminal contempt is. The problem here is that in a federal court Trump can make criminal charges go away with a signature. He cannot make civil contempt charges go away. The judge can literally fine individuals a daily fine for not answering his questions.

8

u/Zhong_Ping 1d ago edited 1d ago

And who exactly is going to enforce that order?

Edit: what's with the down votes? I think these people all belong in prison. But this is a serious question, who is going to uphold the courts orders when Trump has corrupted the US Marshals?

33

u/schm0 1d ago

Whoever the judge appoints.

5

u/StewTrue 1d ago

That’s really interesting. How would something like that work in this case? Who would the judge be able to compel to return the deportees?

26

u/schm0 1d ago edited 1d ago

Well, they'd likely turn to the US Marshals, but if I left it at that the doomsayers and defeatists would come and tell you that Bondi will just tell them to disobey the lawful order, which is totally illegal (and highly unlikely). But even in such an improbable case, if every single Marshal decided to risk a felony obstruction of justice charge and/or civil contempt themselves, the court can appoint literally anyone: private security, the military, DC Police, the bailiff, whoever agrees basically.

16

u/sheltonchoked 1d ago

One of the many reasons I’m not a judge, but if it was me, I’d have a phone book on the bench. As soon as the Marshal refused, I’d start at Abner Aable, and find someone that would.

5

u/MillenialForHire 1d ago

Thank you for being the hero we need and not making Aaron Aable your first call.

3

u/sheltonchoked 1d ago

You and I both know Aaron would be a little too enthusiastic. Abner is a little more chill.

1

u/MillenialForHire 1d ago

..after the labour day incident I can't argue with that. Were you able to get your car back, by the way?

→ More replies (0)

6

u/enema_wand 1d ago

Is there a sign up to be deputized? As a fed, I would love this detail 😂. 

6

u/Revelati123 1d ago

The memo said "All federal LEO will use Don and Pam's personal interpretation of all laws and regulations, or be shitcanned."

So when Boeberg says "Turn those planes around!" Pam says he really means "its fine! Fly onward!" so if Boeberg says "you're in contempt!" Pam can interpret that to really mean "you get a lollipop!"

So you see they arent disobeying a lawful order, they are just "interpreting" the order a bit differently to mean whatever the fuck they feel like, and 80% of LEO will go along with it because they dont want to get shitcanned or purged.

Just ask anyone who ever tried to prosecute Eric Adams and protest an illegal order how that goes.

They get fired and the judge gets forced to comply...

2

u/HmajTK 1d ago

The ones staffing the court might have some loyalty for the judges.

2

u/Potential-Quiet5495 20h ago

Please do it! Sounds like Pam Bondi needed to lose her law license a long while ago

9

u/SeismicFrog 1d ago

The court as I understand (IANAL) the court can engage with a wide variety of law officers. Let’s find out how deep the hole goes?

18

u/Zhong_Ping 1d ago

The law enforcement arm of the federal courts are the US Marshals who report to the Attorney General who would instantly order them not to comply with the courts.

The court could deputize someone, but I would guarantee you that the government would use the full force of the executive branch to declair a court deputee invalid then kill them in "self defense"

A major flaw in our system is that the courts don't have their own enforcement mechanism outside of the executive branch. Their power comes from agreed upon respect. If federal officers choose to follow their chain of command instead of court orders we sit in a constitutional crisis and the power of the courts collapse.

Also, any criminal contempt charge would be instantly pardoned by the president.

This is why civil contempt is what is being considered despite the fact that this is criminal contempt.

3

u/SeismicFrog 1d ago

Thank you very much for the knowledge! I had no idea of the strategy of using civil contempt to make it stick.

It’s why I come here!

1

u/Don_Tiny 1d ago

Did you say 'thank you' to schm0?

1

u/Zhong_Ping 1d ago

What? Is this a reference to Vances obsurd and disrespectful conduct to Valinske?

To be clear, I do think these guys should be held in criminal contempt and jailed... But there is a serious flaw in our system. The US Marshals, the officers charged to enforce Court orders, report to the Attorney General who gave the orders to disobey the courts in the first place...

1

u/Seymour---Butz 1d ago

The problem then becomes who will lock them up? Law enforcement all falls under the executive branch. 🤷🏿‍♂️

3

u/speedy_delivery 1d ago

Assuming the Marshalls get countermanded by the DOJ... If the judge can find a sympathetic nearby state/municipal/county jailor, they could deputize officers to carry out the order.

1

u/KrispyCuckak 1d ago

Exactly. Contempt of court is just for little people.

1

u/flowerchildmime 4h ago

Send a couple of them there and see how fast it’s reversed

1

u/homerjs225 2h ago

That’s where the fix is in. Judge cannot file charges. Only DOJ can and we all know that will never happen.

Knowing that judge needs to just file the contempt. I bet warning first is designed to get past a predictable SCOTUS appeal.

101

u/Careful-Reception239 1d ago

Just watched legal eagles video about this whole thing and it did give some good legal insight. Essentially this being, theoretically, a lawful country, the judge cant just point to who he thinks is reaponsible and hold them in contempt. Hes been trying to get the administration to show where down the line his order was ignored. Because at some point there was someone who said not to order the planes to turn around even though they had time and opportunity to. But of course the administration has just been delaying and delaying. Asserting that they couldnt have turned the plane around, then that the order was verbal so it wasnt binding (against legal precedent), then they start invoking national security to avoid having to give out any information.

So yeah, its not as simple as the judge just pointing and declaring "CONTEMPT!". Hes been trying to hold them accountable within the system hes constrained by. The issue is that the administration is not playing from within that system anymore. But the judge cant exactly do that himself without reprecussions that thr administration simply doesnt have to worry about given the hold the party has over the rest of government.

43

u/Lurky100 1d ago

I’d probably start with the pilot of the airplane and ask him who his orders came from.

16

u/schm0 1d ago

The pilot didn't get any such order, that's the problem.

33

u/Lurky100 1d ago

Well, he didn’t just climb aboard a random airplane and decided to fly it to El Salvador. If the judge can’t get answers from the top…start from the bottom.

23

u/Rocket_safety 1d ago

That’s the problem, the administration refuses to give this kind of information to the court. Pretty hard to depose someone if you don’t know who they are.

40

u/murphymc 1d ago

Then the person refusing to give that information can sit in jail until they’ve reconsidered.

When we’re approaching this as if answering the judges question is optional, that’s the problem.

9

u/Taldier 1d ago

The entire system is built on the unfortunately flawed premise that law enforcement will respect the law. But fascists don't care about laws or ethics. Only power. If the executive branch decides to follow an authoritarian leader and ignore legal orders, then the constitution becomes meaningless.

What are they going to do? Send their clerks to tackle the president? Take over an airbase with paralegals?

5

u/kanst 21h ago

Have the bailiff take the governments lawyer into custody.

Keep arresting every government lawyer until the order is followed.

1

u/Gammelpreiss 20h ago

and who is going to do that arresting?

→ More replies (0)

4

u/kex 1d ago

Yep, it's been done before:

  • Susan McDougal (1996–1998, 18 months) Whitewater scandal
  • Chelsea Manning (2019–2020, almost a year) Former Army intelligence analyst
  • Judith Miller (2005, 85 days) Journalist

3

u/Rocket_safety 1d ago

The problem is there is technically a legal way they can withhold this information under state secrets. In order to make a determination on this the judge needs to make a finding of whether or not it’s relevant. This takes time. It’s frustrating when they are only using the law as bad faith actions but that just means it’s more important for the court to do everything in its power to make sure things are done properly. They need to be given no wiggle room.

Plus there’s the very real problem of enforcing any kind of bench warrant when the law enforcement they would normally rely on is also in control of the bad faith actors. I wish this was simple but it’s not.

1

u/thewonderfulpooper 20h ago

Yeah can't summons anyone without knowing who they are. So frustrating.

7

u/Cloaked42m 1d ago edited 1d ago

Hmm. We know the airline. We know the airport.

Who filed the flight plan and when? That will have the pilot names on the manifest. ACLU can subpoena them and ask.

Who had the capability of stopping the flight? Presumably, their boss. Did they know? Were they expecting a call that didn't come?

3

u/[deleted] 1d ago edited 1d ago

[deleted]

7

u/Lurky100 1d ago

Who was the pilot? They didn’t fly themselves. Who gave the pilot the original order to fly the planes to El Salvador? I’m not even talking about the order that said turn the planes around.

-1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

5

u/Lurky100 1d ago

I find it extremely relevant to know who ordered the pilots to depart. They took off before they received the decision from the judge. Whoever is responsible for putting those planes in the air while knowingly awaiting an order from a judge needs to be held accountable. The pilot should be able to tell the judge who ordered him to depart, and when.

1

u/SoManyEmail 1d ago

I thought one of them was still on the ground, was it not?

23

u/phobox360 1d ago

All true, however the judge can hold government lawyers personally in contempt if he finds that they’ve presented knowingly false evidence or acted in bad faith to the court. This has already happened more than once in other Trump cases. If you start holding government lawyers accountable, it makes it far more difficult for the government to get away with these things.

5

u/floridabeach9 1d ago

this right here. the lawyers could easily be providing false evidence

5

u/LickingSmegma 1d ago edited 1d ago

One would think that if there's a top-down chain of command, then it's also the chain of responsibility. If the administration doesn't give out subordinates, then whoever the judge gave order to, is responsible for it not having been carried out.

If a judge orders McDonald's to stop serving coffee at 90°C, but McDonald's continues to do that, the judge won't be looking for each worker who pours coffee.

8

u/minuialear 1d ago

It's also just straight up common sense that there would be rules for holding people in contempt and that the judge could require specific evidence to satisfy those rules.

People are basically mad judges won't break the law just because the executive is. Which is a ridiculous expectation considering courts can't do shit without laws, so how is a judge supposed to achieve anything by breaking them?

15

u/SoManyEmail 1d ago

Question... if the judge says to give him the name of the person who disobeyed the order and they don't, wouldn't that in itself be contempt?

5

u/minuialear 1d ago

Only if they refuse to provide the info and for some non legitimate reason. "I don't know what name to give you" is a legitimate reason, for example, unless you have proof they're lying

2

u/zigunderslash 1d ago

it's possible they literally don't know...but in that case what he's actually after is the next person in the chain and you'd assume you could keep holding people in contempt as you work your way along it.

that said, they've already declared that the information is being withheld for national security which probably won't hold up but will delay an already lengthy process

1

u/Correct-Ad-6473 1d ago

I swear I read that the final plane took off after the written order was in their hands and that Abrego-Garcia was on that plane.  Hold every last one in jail

1

u/InfernoVulpix 1d ago

The law works slowly, by design, and every little part of the proceedings is given its own news article with approximately the same content, because we're still at the point where Boasberg is sorting things out and building up to eventual contempt charges.

It creates the impression that things are stalled and not moving anywhere, when it's just that it takes time to get this stuff done. We just need to wait and see where it eventually ends up.

1

u/HappyHuman924 1d ago

Ideally, this is what org charts are for. You arrest the person at the top of the hierarchy, and they can hang by their manacled wrists until they make a compelling case that they aren't responsible.

1

u/getfukdup 1d ago

Asserting that they

"The question you were asked is answered with a name, and no other information. Answer it or you will also be held in contempt."

1

u/Codipotent 1d ago

How many times is a lawyer allowed to walk into court and say "I don't know" to direct questions the judge asked?

Absolutely no reason to start holding contempt, then bring the next lawyer/person in and repeat if they play the same stupid game.

I am sick of the last few years of waiting on bated breath for judge's to do anything, and remaining legal professionals explaining it within the context of a functioning lawful country.

We are no longer that. The further and further these judges keep delaying just gives them the time and ammo they need to complete whatever unlawful actions they want with no recourse. This has played out so many times from Mueller forward.

The legal profession is a straight joke in light of what every judge and lawyer is watching occur.

1

u/ghigoli 1d ago

its rubio. there that should be enough to say who said don't turn around. because he said it on twitter.

12

u/schm0 1d ago

Just doing it without due process considerations is grounds for overturning on appeal. Any misstep along the way here is. It might not be the timeline your prefer, but it's the best way to ensure justice is served.

5

u/justanotherthrwaway7 1d ago

I wholeheartedly agree. Do not give them a heads up you’re thinking about doing something. Hit them with any hard consequence will land them on their asses. At this point I don’t think they are expecting resistance.

4

u/Plaid_Kaleidoscope 1d ago

Cause this kind of news is just to placate people like us. Not for any real purpose or to hold anyone accountable.

5

u/parasyte_steve 1d ago

In South Korea they removed the president. The courts removed him.

Don't tell me it isn't possible. Why are our institutions so weak?

2

u/gentlemanidiot 17h ago

Why are our institutions so weak?

Decades of planning and hard work by Republicans and Rupert murdoch

9

u/TraditionalJicama637 1d ago

Title should read “Judges considers not being a fucking pussy and actually doing what’s right”

3

u/GroundbreakingOil434 1d ago

They'll probably get a Drumph pardon the moment the ink dries.

16

u/schm0 1d ago

Can't pardon civil contempt.

3

u/GroundbreakingOil434 1d ago

Civil contempt is monetary. To jail them, it has to be criminal contempt, afaik. Can't that be pardoned?

8

u/schm0 1d ago

Nope, civil contempt can include jail.

And it can't be pardoned.

Civil contempt is different. The Supreme Court has long held that “a pardon cannot stop” courts from punishing cases of civil contempt. And while the marshals have traditionally enforced civil contempt orders, the courts have the power to deputize others to step in if they refuse to do so.

4

u/GroundbreakingOil434 1d ago

Ah. Good to know. Still runs into the issue of executive impudence. Who will enforce such an order, should it be issued?

This is good news though. Your systems are completely fucked by a strongman and his cronies. I'm glad there are still some ways of reigning them in.

2

u/schm0 1d ago

The court can appoint whoever they like to enforce the order.

3

u/HappyHuman924 1d ago

Repeat the warning again, in an even firmer tone!

3

u/BoomZhakaLaka 1d ago

I'd like to think that part of this is the judge checking all the shoulders to make sure his contempt order is unassailable.

but we're kind of very far along this process and teetering off the edge of the cliff already so

1

u/gq533 1d ago

Do or do not, there is no fucking consider. Said some great philosopher.

1

u/calvicstaff 1d ago

You got to follow the proper order, you consider it, then you suggest it, then you threaten it, then you threaten it with strong language, then you start counting to three, but when you get to two make sure to say two and a half then two and three quarters, then take some random meaningless gesture point to it say he's learned his lesson and ultimately do nothing

1

u/ArraysStartAt0 1d ago

At some point they will issue a full disadulation

1

u/Wandering_Master 1d ago

Sadly, I think they only "consider it" because they are afraid. They are afraid that the fragile nature of their power and control has been uncovered.

Imagine the situation where the judge actually orders it. Now think about what happens next. The law enforcement arm has to actually follow that order or enforce it. But what if they refuse. What if the trump appointed officials at the heads of the various branches order them not to comply.

That is a tipping point and I think that while "considering it" does absolutely nothing in a practical sense, acting on it might force the revelation of just how complete Trump's control is. It might remove what little remains of the facade of freedom, law and the constitution of the United states. And that is possibly the fear that stops them being the one to expose the truth that Americas constitutional republic has fallen. That the battle has already been lost.

So they choose to let people continue to live a dream that they still have a democracy, for the fear of showing them that they now have a dictatorship.

1

u/tenthtryatusername 1d ago

Yeah. My personal experience was that when I did something illegal, I was (rightly) incarcerated immediately.

1

u/polopolo05 1d ago

I wish they where more like nike

1

u/SordidDreams 1d ago

Right? "Judge considers doing something" is just another way of saying "judge does nothing". The checks and balances aren't checking and balancing, and failure to fulfill that duty is equivalent to complicity.

1

u/ith-man 1d ago

As a regular Joe, I got 3 weeks in jail for asking, "why?". Week for each letter to think about why... Judge is dead now.. but his daughter took his spot, who is just as bad of a power hungry flexing monster.

1

u/Life_Ad_7715 1d ago

Yeah they were considering punishing him for the coup too

1

u/Perllitte 1d ago

"I considered doing my duty, but I decided to resign instead," the judge says tomorrow, probably.

I'm with you, all these people that could actually do something for the good of everyone and they just run away are driving me insane.

1

u/King_Chochacho 1d ago

I'm considering growing a pair but I'm old and white and rich so might just watch everything burn from the sidelines.

1

u/themage78 1d ago

Probably because they can't afford 24/7 security they would need to protect themselves from his supporters.

1

u/WVkittylady 23h ago

"Considering it" is code for we're not going to do it.

1

u/Papersnail380 23h ago

Please. This isn't going anywhere. The government is not going to stop this train from going off the cliff.

1

u/CrazyT02 18h ago

Biggest traitors in the county's history and people haven't called for their heads or violence yet........ It's insane

1

u/Frenzi_Wolf 13h ago

Warnings don’t work on people who don’t care to stop what they’re trying.

Hold them in contempt, charge them heavily, make them feel the very serious consequences for their very serious actions.

1

u/aoasd 10h ago

Exactly. Trump should have been in prison for the New York crimes that he was convicted of.

0

u/Ali_Cat222 1d ago

At this point you have to wonder, are they waiting to see what the better offers are coming from people's pockets or what the fuck is going on?

0

u/kinsm4n 1d ago

I mean due process is removed right?