Attorney General Pam Bondi said the appeal was necessary to stop what she described as “lawless judicial activism,” accusing Boasberg of threatening attorney-client privilege and violating separation-of-powers principles in retaliation for the administration’s immigration enforcement. Bondi said the dispute stems from the administration’s decision to remove Venezuelan nationals alleged to be members of the Tren de Aragua gang.

TRUMP GIVEN WEEK OF WINS AND FAKE SCANDAL: WHITE HOUSE REPORT CARD

“This radical, retaliatory, unconstitutional campaign against the Trump Administration will not stand,” Bondi said.

In Friday’s filing, the DOJ accused Boasberg, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, of retaliatory conduct, saying his pursuit of testimony from government lawyers creates “a strong appearance that the district judge is engaged in a pattern of retaliation and harassment.”

“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,” the department wrote. Judges Neomi Rao and Justin Walker voted to grant the stay, while Judge Michelle Childs said she would have denied the stay.

However, the majority emphasized the stay is temporary and “should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits.”

The appeal, which sought to curtail a Monday hearing, marks a sharp escalation in the administration’s legal ensnarement with Boasberg, who has been pursuing a fact-finding inquiry into whether Trump officials defied his emergency March order directing deportation flights to turn around while en route to El Salvador.

The contempt dispute traces back to March 15, when Trump invoked the rarely used Alien Enemies Act to rapidly deport nearly 140 Venezuelan men identified by DHS as gang members. Boasberg ordered the planes turned around, but the men were transferred to Salvadoran custody and later imprisoned at the country’s Terrorism Confinement Center.

DEMOCRATS NEED TO TEMPER THEIR EXPECTATIONS OF A 2026 BLUE WAVE

Boasberg had scheduled testimony from former DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni on Monday and current DOJ lawyer Drew Ensign on Tuesday to consider whether there is a need to refer any administration officials for criminal contempt.

Reuveni, the former DOJ employee whose “whistleblower” status has been disputed by Bondi, alleges senior officials decided in advance to ignore whatever the court ordered. According to his account of the events, former senior DOJ official Emil Bove suggested during a March 14 meeting that the department might have to tell the courts “f*** you” and proceed with removals regardless. Bove has denied the allegation, calling it false and distorted.

Reuveni’s materials include emails sent the night of March 15 as the American Civil Liberties Union sought emergency relief to block the flights. He has also claimed Ensign knew deportation planes were already in the air when representations were made to the court.

“He knows they are being removed,” Reuveni said of Ensign, specifying that he knew “about the flights.”

Ensign, the DOJ’s main witness, wrote in a sworn declaration that he relayed Boasberg’s order to relevant parties, including the Department of Homeland Security, but did not address whether he was aware flights were pending. The DOJ has said Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ultimately directed the flights to continue.

In April, Boasberg’s finding that the government showed “probable cause” for contempt was vacated by a three-judge appeals panel on jurisdictional grounds, a decision the full D.C. Circuit declined to revisit in November. However, the appeals court emphasized that its decision should not be read as excusing defiance of court orders.

JUDGE JAMES BOASBERG SEEKS TESTIMONY FROM DOJ ‘WHISTLEBLOWER’ IN CRIMINAL CONTEMPT INQUIRY

“We fully appreciate the seriousness of the governmental conduct the district court observed,” the appeals court wrote, stressing that respect for judicial orders and the judiciary’s contempt power “are essential to the rule of law,” and that the district court remains free to continue its fact-finding hearings.

Boasberg has said any subsequent contempt referral remains possible and that defiance of a court order may be punishable even if the underlying order is later invalidated. His actions have made him a political target of Republicans, with Trump calling for his impeachment and GOP lawmakers introducing impeachment articles and calling for his temporary suspension.