Justice Department files complaint against judges over immigration enforcement surge comments

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department filed a complaint Wednesday against federal judges in Minnesota over their remarks to the media about the pressure on their courthouse during the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement surge.

The complaint alleges the seven judges — nominated by Democratic and Republican presidents — violated judicial ethics by speaking to The New York Times about their experience dealing with a flood of cases during last winter’s Operation Metro Surge crackdown that led to thousands of arrests in the Twin Cities.

The complaint escalates the department’s battle with the federal judiciary, which has halted administration priorities, dismissed high-profile prosecutions and accused government lawyers in some cases of failing to comply with court orders.

The department is demanding that the judges recuse themselves from all criminal or civil cases involving the Department of Homeland Security, Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters, because of what he described as “obvious bias they have shown” in their remarks to the newspaper.

“When we have a situation like we have now, where you have a judge, a couple of judges, just not only violating the canons in our view, but also showing bias in what they’re saying, we have no choice but to act to defend not only our prosecutors, but also DHS,” Blanche said.

The judge at the center of the story, Patrick Schiltz, accused the government in January of failing to comply with nearly 100 court orders. He said in a ruling that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a part of DHS, “is not a law unto itself.”

Schiltz, who was nominated by Republican President George W. Bush and served as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, told the newspaper that what happened in Minnesota’s federal court last winter “created a grave threat to the rule of law.”

For Subscribers

FOR SUBSCRIBERSViolence, transphobia and couple’s competing abuse claims preceded a deadly confrontation in a California park

FOR SUBSCRIBERSFrom clean energy warrior to ‘wall of shame,’ James Talarico reverses on a fossil fuel money pledge

FOR SUBSCRIBERSCongressional staff planned official trip with luxury stops in Italy and France weeks before election

FOR SUBSCRIBERSA harrowing ordeal aboard an Israel-bound plane

FOR SUBSCRIBERSOpenAI CEO Sam Altman to skip congressional hearing on rogue AI agents

FOR SUBSCRIBERSKey DOJ lawyers departed Trump ‘grand conspiracy’ probe amid pressure to produce, source says

FOR SUBSCRIBERSTrump’s new AI chatbot often links to a site launched under Clinton 26 years ago

FOR SUBSCRIBERSAt MAHA summit, industry CEOs the movement once vilified take the stage

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThis Paralympian has two goals: Win medals and give away $500,000 to her teammates

FOR SUBSCRIBERSCornell rape allegation spotlights stringent New York state laws that have long drawn criticism

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe debate over AI’s future rages on both coasts

FOR SUBSCRIBERSDecades-old march dispute reignites in Northern Ireland, threatening political crisis

FOR SUBSCRIBERSMore oil is getting out of the Middle East. Why is it still so expensive?

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe complicated bargain between ‘looksmaxxing’ influencer Clavicular and the women in his orbit

FOR SUBSCRIBERSSenators unveil bipartisan bill to deliver essential newborn supply kits to new moms

In a statement Wednesday, a spokesperson for the Minnesota court said legal experts have confirmed that the judges were acting “well within the ethical rules that apply to federal judges” in speaking to the newspaper. Schiltz also said in a statement that his comments did not violate any ethical rules.

For Subscribers

FOR SUBSCRIBERSViolence, transphobia and couple’s competing abuse claims preceded a deadly confrontation in a California park

FOR SUBSCRIBERSFrom clean energy warrior to ‘wall of shame,’ James Talarico reverses on a fossil fuel money pledge

FOR SUBSCRIBERSCongressional staff planned official trip with luxury stops in Italy and France weeks before election

FOR SUBSCRIBERSA harrowing ordeal aboard an Israel-bound plane

FOR SUBSCRIBERSOpenAI CEO Sam Altman to skip congressional hearing on rogue AI agents

FOR SUBSCRIBERSKey DOJ lawyers departed Trump ‘grand conspiracy’ probe amid pressure to produce, source says

FOR SUBSCRIBERSTrump’s new AI chatbot often links to a site launched under Clinton 26 years ago

FOR SUBSCRIBERSAt MAHA summit, industry CEOs the movement once vilified take the stage

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThis Paralympian has two goals: Win medals and give away $500,000 to her teammates

FOR SUBSCRIBERSCornell rape allegation spotlights stringent New York state laws that have long drawn criticism

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe debate over AI’s future rages on both coasts

FOR SUBSCRIBERSDecades-old march dispute reignites in Northern Ireland, threatening political crisis

FOR SUBSCRIBERSMore oil is getting out of the Middle East. Why is it still so expensive?

FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe complicated bargain between ‘looksmaxxing’ influencer Clavicular and the women in his orbit

FOR SUBSCRIBERSSenators unveil bipartisan bill to deliver essential newborn supply kits to new moms

“Indeed, in February of this year, the Committee on Codes of Conduct issued an advisory opinion to emphasize that federal judges” may speak or write “on core judiciary matters such as advocacy for the rule of law and judicial independence,” Schiltz said in a statement. “That is exactly what I did.”

The complaint was filed with the chief judge of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees federal judges in Minnesota.

The Republican administration has railed against what it describes as “activist judges” who officials say are intent on thwarting Trump’s agenda. Yet some of the most critical and unfavorable court rulings have come from judges nominated by Trump and other Republican presidents.