The Trump administration introduced a constitutional curveball by suing the entire bench of the US District Court for the District of Maryland, 15 sitting judges, in their own courthouse over the court’s ruling in which automatically pauses any deportation from Maryland for two business days when a detainee files a fresh habeas petition.
Is Maryland’s deportation pause order, judicial overreach ?
The Trump administration filed the lawsuit in Baltimore, which argued that Maryland’s standing order defied both US Supreme Court precedent on injunctive relief and the clear intent of Congress. The Justice Department labels the order an “egregious example of judicial overreach,” portraying it as yet another entry in a growing list of courtroom interventions that have hamstrung the administration’s ability to carry out its immigration agenda .
The order was signed by Chief US District Judge George Russell after a prolonged legal battle over the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia—a Salvadoran national with an American wife and child—who was removed to El Salvador despite a 2019 immigration court ruling shielding him from return due to the threat of gang violence.
Why sue judges instead of appealing orders?
To contest a trial court's decision, a party would need to do so within the same case or request that an appellate court overturn the ruling.
"It is a shocking move by the Justice Department that is simply unprecedented," said Marin Levy, a professor at Duke University School of Law. "And it seems like part of a strategic attempt to attack the courts rather than any sort of good faith litigation."
Fight for democracy versus docket management.
US Attorney General Pam Bondi stated that President Trump was elected to implement his policy agenda, and that continued judicial interference not only disrupts that mandate but also poses a serious threat to the integrity of the democratic process.
"Every unlawful order entered by the district courts robs the Executive Branch of its most scarce resource: time to put its policies into effect," the Justice Department stated in the lawsuit. "In the process, such orders diminish the votes of the citizens who elected the head of the Executive Branch."
For the judiciary, it is a stress test of institutional independence. Do judges, like other litigants, have to defend themselves in court for interpreting the law?
Is Maryland’s deportation pause order, judicial overreach ?
The Trump administration filed the lawsuit in Baltimore, which argued that Maryland’s standing order defied both US Supreme Court precedent on injunctive relief and the clear intent of Congress. The Justice Department labels the order an “egregious example of judicial overreach,” portraying it as yet another entry in a growing list of courtroom interventions that have hamstrung the administration’s ability to carry out its immigration agenda .
The order was signed by Chief US District Judge George Russell after a prolonged legal battle over the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia—a Salvadoran national with an American wife and child—who was removed to El Salvador despite a 2019 immigration court ruling shielding him from return due to the threat of gang violence.
Why sue judges instead of appealing orders?
To contest a trial court's decision, a party would need to do so within the same case or request that an appellate court overturn the ruling.
"It is a shocking move by the Justice Department that is simply unprecedented," said Marin Levy, a professor at Duke University School of Law. "And it seems like part of a strategic attempt to attack the courts rather than any sort of good faith litigation."
Fight for democracy versus docket management.
US Attorney General Pam Bondi stated that President Trump was elected to implement his policy agenda, and that continued judicial interference not only disrupts that mandate but also poses a serious threat to the integrity of the democratic process.
"Every unlawful order entered by the district courts robs the Executive Branch of its most scarce resource: time to put its policies into effect," the Justice Department stated in the lawsuit. "In the process, such orders diminish the votes of the citizens who elected the head of the Executive Branch."
For the judiciary, it is a stress test of institutional independence. Do judges, like other litigants, have to defend themselves in court for interpreting the law?
You may also like
Green Card vs Canadian PR: What's better for skilled migrants?
India refuses to sign SCO joint statement as China, Pakistan avoid hard line on terror
Tragic Flash Floods in Himachal Pradesh Claim Lives and Leave Many Missing
SSC Stenographer 2025: Government jobs for 12th pass, apply immediately for SSC Stenographer Recruitment..
'I visited best beach in Majorca - it was beautiful aside from one problem'
