Appeals Court to Review Inquiry Into Trump’s Deportation of Venezuelan Migrants

A federal appeals court will review whether a criminal contempt inquiry related to the Trump administration’s deportation of Venezuelan migrants can continue. At the center of the issue is former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, identified as the key official in the decision to transfer Venezuelan detainees to El Salvador despite a court order preventing their removal.

Background of the Dispute

The controversy began in 2025 when the Trump administration acted to deport Venezuelan migrants, labeling them members of the Tren de Aragua gang under the Alien Enemies Act. Two planes with detainees departed on March 15, 2025. At this time, Judge James Boasberg, overseeing a corresponding lawsuit, issued a temporary restraining order. This order prohibited the government from removing the migrants for 14 days.

Despite the order, the planes continued to El Salvador. The Supreme Court overruled Boasberg’s order weeks later, stating the migrants needed to file their challenges in the federal districts where detained. Regardless, Boasberg persisted with a contempt inquiry, believing the government’s actions violated his restraining order.

Noem’s Role in the Decision

In April 2025, Judge Boasberg expressed a suspicion of deliberate violation by the government. He considered starting a criminal contempt inquiry. The government later credited Noem as the person responsible for the decision to move the detainees, made based on legal advice at the time.

Boasberg had verbally ordered on March 15 the planes be returned to the U.S. The government disputed the order’s binding status because it wasn’t written. They later noted a written order didn’t specifically command the return of those already departed. Subsequently, Noem allowed the transfer of detainees to Salvadoran custody, where they went to CECOT, a maximum-security prison in El Salvador.

Legal Challenges and Appeals

The government contended Boasberg exceeded his power by pursuing the inquiry. In April 2026, a split decision by a three-judge panel ordered Boasberg to end the inquiry. They argued the order lacked clarity for criminal contempt regarding transferring migrants. They cautioned against the inquiry into high-level decisions related to national security and diplomacy.

Upcoming Court Decision

The full D.C. Circuit court agreed to reconsider the panel’s ruling. They will decide if Boasberg’s inquiry can proceed. If it continues, Noem might face a criminal contempt referral. However, she hasn’t been charged. In August, 204 former judges urged the court to maintain the inquiry, describing the district court’s investigation as proper.

The en banc court will hear arguments on Tuesday.