The Justice Department filed a misconduct complaint Wednesday against a group of federal judges in Minnesota who publicly complained about President Trump’s immigration policies, which the government said ruined their ability to be impartial.
Seven judges spoke to The New York Times about Mr. Trump’s enforcement surge earlier this year and the cases that ended up in court. In the article, the judges questioned the wisdom of the arrests that were made and compared the administration’s conduct to authoritarian regimes in China or North Korea.
Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter said those ruminations went well beyond the boundaries of judges’ conduct and taint the entire federal bench in Minnesota.
People were interested in these podcasts
“These judges should be ordered to recuse from any matters involving DHS because the public reasonably questions their impartiality in cases involving immigration,” Mr. McCotter and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward said in their formal complaint.
They also asked for an investigation into the judges themselves for putting a desire for publicity above their judicial duties.
The complaint was filed with the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees the state and its judges.
The Washington Times has sought comment from a spokeswoman for the Minnesota court.
Filing the complaint marks an escalation on the part of the Justice Department in a battle that’s lasted most of this year.
Minnesota’s federal judges were particularly harsh in rulings against the Trump administration amid the surge, ordering the release of migrants who’d been arrested and delivering judicial spankings when the government didn’t move quickly to comply.
Judge Patrick J. Schiltz, in one ruling, said it was “beyond the pale” that the administration surged Department of Homeland Security personnel to make arrests but didn’t prepare the U.S. attorney’s office to handle the tsunami of litigation that resulted. Judge Schiltz, a George W. Bush appointee, was chief judge of the court at the time, though he has since relinquished that post.
Judge Schiltz was the main voice in the article that prompted the new ethics complaint, sitting for a 90-minute interview with a reporter.
He told the newspaper the administration had a “disregard” for court orders, which helped fuel tensions in the city as unruly protesters clashed with aggressive DHS agents. He called the administration’s actions “a grave threat to the rule of law.”
Judge John Tunheim, a Clinton appointee, also allowed himself to be quoted by name. He questioned the types of people being arrested, echoing complaints of immigrant-rights activists that DHS agents “weren’t arresting, in my view, people who were dangerous criminals on the streets.”
The article said other judges also spoke but did so on condition of not being named.
Mr. McCotter said Minnesota’s judges are bound by rules urging them not to speak to the press, even to give “seemingly innocuous statements.” The 8th Circuit has said judges “must be above the fray, not become an advocate in it.”
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.