{"id":27139,"date":"2025-12-18T07:04:35","date_gmt":"2025-12-18T07:04:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cndailynews.store\/?p=27139"},"modified":"2025-12-18T07:04:35","modified_gmt":"2025-12-18T07:04:35","slug":"appeals-court-thwarts-boasbergs-contempt-proceedings-against-trump-officials%f0%9f%8c%8d%f0%9f%8c%8d","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cndailynews.store\/?p=27139","title":{"rendered":"Appeals Court Thwarts Boasberg\u2019s Contempt Proceedings Against Trump Officials\ud83c\udf0d\ud83c\udf0d"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\"\"
\u00a0Getty Images<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

This article may contain commentary
\nwhich reflects the author’s opinion.<\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

A federal appeals court has intervened to halt U.S. District Judge James Boasberg\u2019s contempt proceedings against the Trump administration, directing all parties to pause until 2026 while the court reviews whether Boasberg has any authority to pursue contempt at all.<\/p>\n

Advertisement<\/div>\n

In a December 15 order, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals\u2014Judges Neomi Rao, Justin Walker, and Michelle Childs\u2014granted the administration\u2019s request to delay the matter and ordered both sides to submit detailed legal arguments on the scope of a district court\u2019s contempt powers.<\/p>\n

The order came amid escalating tensions between the judiciary and the administration over Trump\u2019s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.<\/p>\n

The appellate court\u2019s directive requires the respondents to file a response by December 29, 2025, and the administration to reply by January 5, 2026.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The panel instructed the parties to specifically address whether a district court has the legal authority to investigate and delay a criminal referral in a case of so-called \u201cindirect contempt.\u201d<\/p>\n

Quoting\u00a0the order<\/a>, the panel wrote:\u00a0\u201cFederal law recognizes that criminal contempt may be direct or indirect. \u2026 A court may initiate criminal proceedings for indirect contempt through notice and a referral for prosecution. \u2026 In seeking information about decisions made outside the presence of the court and referencing the possibility of a referral for prosecution, the district court appears to contemplate indirect contempt proceedings. \u2026 On what legal basis may a district court (1) investigate possible grounds for indirect contempt and (2) delay a referral for prosecution until it finds probable cause that indirect contempt occurred?\u201d<\/p>\n

Advertisement<\/div>\n

The appellate order effectively\u00a0postpones<\/a>\u00a0Judge Boasberg\u2019s planned contempt hearings and punts the matter into next year, adding yet another delay in a high-profile legal battle that has already drawn national scrutiny.<\/p>\n

Boasberg, an Obama appointee and chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, has been locked in a months-long dispute with the administration over whether federal officials violated his March order temporarily halting deportation flights to El Salvador.<\/p>\n

The flights were part of Trump\u2019s enforcement of the Alien Enemies Act\u2014a 1798 law allowing the removal of non-citizens from hostile nations during periods of conflict.<\/p>\n

Advertisement<\/p>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n