Appeals court temporarily halts contempt probe against Trump administration ordered by Judge Boasberg

An appeals court temporarily halted the contempt proceedings against the Trump administration launched by Judge James Boasberg. The district judge, nominated by Barack Obama, ordered an investigation into whether senior executive officials deliberately violated his March 15 emergency court order halting the deportations of illegal immigrants to jail in El Salvador.

Judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Friday ruled 2 to 1 in favor of the Trump administration's request to temporarily halt the process. The court was faced with the dispute over whether the Trump administration's use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador in March was proper, and whether top Trump officials willfully disobeyed the ruling of Boasberg and continued with the deportation flights.

The appeals court ruling, Justices Neomi Rao and Justin Walker explained in a brief emergency order, seeks to "allow the court time to render a decision on the mandamus petition and the stay motion."

A temporary decision that "should not be construed as a ruling on the merits"

However, both judges stressed that the decision is temporary and "should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits" of the emergency petition, which had been filed by the Trump administration hours earlier to suspend the proceedings and remove Boasberg from the case.

The court's emergency order is a victory, albeit a temporary one, for the administration, since it achieves one of its main goals, which was to avoid the appearance before Boasberg of two top Justice Department officials next week.

In their emergency motion, DOJ lawyers charged that Boasberg's contempt investigation is an "idiosyncratic and misguided inquiry" outside the district court's jurisdiction.

DOJ asks to remove Boasberg for engaging "in a pattern of retaliation and harassment"

The Trump administration also claimed that the appeals court removed Judge Boasberg from the case, accusing him of engaging "in a pattern of retaliation and harassment" in his consideration of the case.

"This latest order portends a circus that threatens the separation of powers and the attorney-client privilege alike. This long-running saga never should have begun; should not have continued at all after this Court’s last intervention; and certainly should not be allowed to escalate into the unseemly and unnecessary interbranch conflict that it now imminently portends."