invoked the Alien Enemies Act against members of Tren de

Aragua, a Venezuelan criminal gang and foreign terrorist

organization, and ordered that they be detained and removed

from the United States. In a series of fast-moving events on

March 15, 2025, the government placed a group of alleged

gang members, including plaintiffs in this case, on planes to El

Salvador. After the planes took off and left the country, the

district court ordered the government not to remove the

plaintiffs from the United States.

The Supreme Court vacated the district court’s order

because it was premised on a legal error and the plaintiffs’ suit

was brought in the wrong court. Nonetheless, the district court

threatened to hold government officials in criminal contempt

unless they complied with the now-vacated order by, for

instance, taking back custody of the plaintiffs. We issued a writ

of mandamus vacating the court’s first contempt order.

Undeterred, the district court is proceeding with criminal

contempt for the government’s decision to transfer the

plaintiffs to the custody of El Salvador. To cooperate, the

government identified then-Secretary of Homeland Security

Kristi Noem as the official responsible for the transfer decision.

The district court previously said this was the only information

it required to make a referral for prosecution. But the district

court has now expanded its inquest and ordered hearings to

extract more information from government counsel about

exactly what happened last March. The government petitions

for mandamus.

The widening gyre of the district court’s investigation

again calls for the extraordinary remedy of mandamus to halt

the judicial “impairment of another branch in the performance

of its constitutional duties.” Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C.,

USCA Case #25-5452 Document #2168528 Filed: 04/14/2026 Page 2 of 122

3

542 U.S. 367, 390 (2004) (cleaned up). The district court

proposes to probe high-level Executive Branch deliberations

about matters of national security and diplomacy. These

proceedings are a clear abuse of discretion, as the district

court’s order said nothing about transferring custody of the

plaintiffs and therefore lacks the clarity to support criminal

contempt based on the transfer of custody. Moreover, the

government has already provided the name of the responsible

official, so further judicial investigation is unnecessary and

therefore improper. In these circumstances, mandamus is

appropriate to prevent the district court from assuming an

antagonistic jurisdiction that encroaches on the autonomy of

the Executive Branch.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856951&forum_id=2).#49816646)

Libs getting complacent because the judicial purge isn’t being talked about as much but it is still very much happening.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856951&forum_id=2).#49816673)

funny thing to me is that Boasberg and his ilk are so morally certain of themselves but they've wildldy overplayed their hands and now go down as errant judges consumed by TDS.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856951&forum_id=2).#49816694)