The Justice Department has filed an official complaint alleging misconduct by US District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg. 

The complaint, which was directed by AG Pam Bondi and reviewed by Fox News, was written by Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle and addressed to the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Sri Srinivasan.

“The Department of Justice respectfully submits this complaint alleging misconduct by U.S. District Court Chief Judge James E. Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Donald J. Trump to the Chief Justice of the United States and other federal judges that have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary,” says Mr. Mizelle.

Judge Boasberg is presiding over a high-profile case involving the deportation of several migrants to El Salvador and has talked about holding DOJ lawyers in contempt because of his assertion that his order to turn airborne planes around was not followed. President Trump has also made critical comments about Judge Boasberg.

The complaint details two occasions on which Judge Boasberg made comments that the Justice Department alleges undermine the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

“On March 11, 2025, Judge Boasberg attended a session of the Judicial Conference of the United States, which exists to discuss administrative matters like budgets, security, and facilities. While there, Judge Boasberg attempted to improperly influence Chief Justice Roberts and roughly two dozen other federal judges by straying from the traditional topics to express his belief that the Trump Administration would “disregard rulings of federal courts” and trigger “a constitutional crisis.” Although his comments would be inappropriate even if they had some basis, they were even worse because Judge Boasberg had no basis—the Trump Administration has always complied with all court orders. Nor did Judge Boasberg identify any purported violations of court orders to justify his unprecedented predictions.”

“Within days of those statements, Judge Boasberg began acting on his preconceived belief that the Trump Administration would not follow court orders. First, although he lacked authority to do so, he issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Government from removing violent Tren de Aragua terrorists, which the Supreme Court summarily vacated.

“Taken together, Judge Boasberg’s words and deeds violate Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, and, erode public confidence in judicial neutrality, and warrant a formal investigation.” 

Federal Judge James Boasberg became a key figure in the fight over border security this year, after issuing a controversial temporary restraining order on March 15 that blocked President Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to speed up deportations of hundreds of Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador.

Boasberg went so far as to demand that all flights bound for El Salvador be “immediately” returned to U.S. soil—an order that was not carried out. His emergency action set off a chain of legal challenges around the country, beginning with the March 15 case in his court, and eventually drew in the Supreme Court. The high court would later rule—twice—that the Trump administration’s expedited removals did not violate constitutional due process.

Despite these rulings, Boasberg and his handling of the matter have been sharply criticized by Trump administration officials, who say his order interfered with the executive branch’s authority to secure the border. President Trump himself suggested earlier this year that Boasberg could be impeached over his conduct, prompting Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare public statement.

The current complaint against Boasberg—originally appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush in 2002—comes just as he may once again play a decisive role in a major class-action case involving the same group of former CECOT migrants.