Judicial Conduct Complaint Against Trump-Critic Judge Tossed by Appeals Court

Washington — A judicial misconduct complaint filed by the Justice Department against U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg has been formally dismissed by a federal appeals court, marking a significant rebuke of the administration's efforts to sanction a judge who ruled against its immigration policies.

In a detailed 15-page order made public Tuesday, Chief Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the department's complaint "lacked sufficient evidence" to proceed. The complaint alleged Judge Boasberg made "improper public comments" during a closed-door meeting of the Judicial Conference last March, expressing concerns the Trump administration might "disregard rulings of federal courts."

"The complaint offers no source for what, if anything, the subject judge said," Judge Sutton wrote, noting the Justice Department failed to provide a crucial attachment detailing the alleged remarks even when asked. "A recycling of unadorned allegations... does not corroborate them."

The dispute is deeply entwined with the high-stakes legal battle over the administration's invocation of the rarely used Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Judge Boasberg, who sits on the D.C. District Court, repeatedly ruled against the government's attempt to summarily remove Venezuelan migrants—alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang—to a prison in El Salvador. In one sharply worded order, he found probable cause for criminal contempt against officials for their "willful disregard" of his injunction.

Legal analysts see the dismissal as a robust defense of judicial independence. "The Judicial Conference is precisely the forum where judges should be able to candidly discuss concerns about branch relations without fear of reprisal," Sutton noted, adding that such discussions fall squarely within norms of judicial conduct.

The complaint, initially filed with the D.C. Circuit, was transferred to the 6th Circuit by Chief Justice John Roberts—a move underscoring the case's sensitivity. It represents one of several recent instances where the Justice Department has sought disciplinary action against judges who have ruled against administration policies, including a separate complaint against D.C. District Judge Ana Reyes.

Voices & Reaction:

Eleanor Vance, Constitutional Law Professor at Georgetown: "This dismissal sends a clear message. The judicial misconduct process cannot be weaponized to chill judicial speech or retaliate for unfavorable rulings. Judge Sutton's order reaffirms the careful boundaries that protect an independent judiciary."

Marcus Thorne, Former Federal Prosecutor: "While the evidence may have been lacking here, the underlying concern is valid. Judges must be circumspect in extrajudicial comments, especially on pending matters. The department was right to inquire, but the burden of proof is—and should be—high."

Rebecca Shaw, Immigration Policy Advocate: "This is a blatant attempt by the administration to intimidate judges who dare to check their overreach. Targeting Boasberg and Reyes isn't about ethics; it's about silencing dissent. It's disgusting and an attack on the rule of law itself."

David P. Chen, Legal Correspondent: "The procedural history is telling. The transfer from the D.C. Circuit suggests an effort to ensure impartial review. Ultimately, the failure to provide basic evidence doomed the complaint, leaving the administration's grievances without a judicial forum."