U.S. District Judge James Boasberg is set to hear arguments from immigration attorneys and the Trump administration this Thursday. The focus will be on new evidence and claims central to a significant immigration case during President Donald Trump’s second term, signaling another contentious legal battle.
While Judge Boasberg has not yet specified which motions he will address, this hearing follows intense scrutiny and criticism from President Trump regarding so-called “activist” judges. This criticism intensified after Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order on March 15, attempting to halt the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act—a wartime immigration statute from 1798—to expedite the deportation of hundreds of Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador earlier this year.
Boasberg’s order also mandated the immediate return of all aircraft bound for El Salvador to U.S. soil, an instruction that was not fully executed.
This emergency directive initiated a complex legal dispute, leading to numerous federal court challenges nationwide. The case before Boasberg on March 15 was the first of these. Subsequently, the Supreme Court twice ruled that these rapid deportations infringed upon the due process rights guaranteed to migrants under the U.S. Constitution.
Consequently, Judge Boasberg finds himself at the epicenter of the legal repercussions.
Although the initial order is currently in a state of suspension—the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia placed a stay on the ruling two months ago pending review—Thursday’s hearing could reignite this deeply divisive legal confrontation.
It is anticipated that Boasberg will consider the plaintiffs’ requests to reopen limited discovery. These requests are based on new evidence, including a recent United Nations report. This report indicates that Salvadoran officials attribute sole legal responsibility and custody of migrants transferred to CECOT to the U.S. Additionally, a whistleblower report from former Justice Department attorney Erez Reuveni, who was involved in the case shortly before his dismissal, has been submitted.
Administration officials under President Trump have frequently criticized Boasberg, labeling him an “activist judge.” This term is typically applied to judges who have obstructed or delayed the President’s policy initiatives enacted through executive orders. President Trump himself suggested the possibility of impeaching Boasberg earlier this year, drawing a rare public rebuke from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
The friction between Judge Boasberg and the Trump administration escalated significantly earlier this year. In April, Boasberg determined there was probable cause to hold the administration in criminal contempt for failing to return the aircraft to U.S. soil as per his emergency order. He stated that the court found the administration demonstrated a “willful disregard” for his directive.
The Trump administration subsequently appealed these findings to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
In June, Boasberg issued an order requiring the Trump administration to grant all noncitizens deported to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador the opportunity to seek habeas relief in court and contest their alleged gang affiliations.
His comprehensive 69-page order commenced with a reference to Franz Kafka’s novel “The Trial.” In the book, the protagonist, Josef K., is arrested by two unfamiliar men outside his room for unspecified offenses.
“This mirrors the predicament faced by Frengel Reyes Mota, Andry Jose Hernandez Romero, and numerous other Venezuelan noncitizens, who assert they were thrust into such a situation on March 15, 2025,” Boasberg stated.
Thursday’s hearing occurs amidst a surge of new reports and allegations presented by the plaintiffs in the case, aimed at reopening the discovery phase.
