Federal district court judges reviewing President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda and other contested policies are increasingly being checked by appeals courts, raising questions as to whether some members of the federal judiciary are implementing the law or seeking partisan ends.The result has created a pattern in which lower courts block administration actions, higher courts narrow or halt those orders, and district judges then revisit the same policies through new procedural routes. The trend has become especially pronounced in immigration cases, where judges are clashing over how much power federal courts have to second-guess Trump administration detention decisions that the Justice Department says Congress placed largely beyond district court review.The clearest rebuke came in April, when Chief Judge James Boasberg, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, was ordered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to end a criminal contempt inquiry into DOJ officials over deportation flights carried out under the Alien Enemies Act last March.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, stands for a portrait at E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, March 16, 2023. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post via AP, File)
