A serious situation unfolded recently where a federal judge became very upset with the Trump administration for trying to secretly deport a group of immigrants to South Sudan. This wasn’t just a bad policy decision—it directly went against a court order that had already said the government was not allowed to do that without giving the immigrants fair warning and a chance to explain why they shouldn’t be sent there.
The judge involved is Brian Murphy, who was appointed by President Joe Biden. He was shocked and angry that the government ignored his instructions. He accused them of acting like immigration law was some kind of game, doing whatever they wanted without consequences.
During a courtroom hearing, he told government lawyers they were behaving in ways that made it hard to trust them. He said they might even be in criminal contempt, which means they could face punishment for not following his legal orders. Although he hasn’t officially punished anyone yet, that could happen soon.
The people the government tried to deport weren’t even from South Sudan. They were immigrants from other countries, but the U.S. decided to send them there anyway, even though the State Department warns Americans not to travel there because it’s so dangerous. The country is going through a brutal civil war, with violence, instability, and little protection for human rights. The government gave these immigrants less than 24 hours’ notice before putting them on a plane. Their lawyers barely had time to act, and they had to rush to court while their clients were already being flown to Africa.
Judge Murphy had already made it clear in a legal order that the government couldn’t deport anyone to a third country—especially a dangerous one—without at least giving them 10 days’ notice and a chance to say they could face torture, abuse, or even death if they were sent there. The fact that the Trump administration ignored that order and went ahead anyway made it clear that they were acting outside the law.
The Justice Department lawyers tried to argue that 24 hours was enough time for immigrants to speak up and ask for help. But that’s not how due process works in the U.S., and the judge didn’t accept that argument. In fact, the Supreme Court had just ruled recently that 24 hours was not enough time in a similar case involving Venezuelan immigrants facing deportation to El Salvador. So the lawyers’ defense didn’t make much sense, and the judge wasn’t buying it.
To make things worse, House Republicans passed a bill the very next day that would take away power from judges like Murphy. The bill includes a small but dangerous rule that says federal judges can’t enforce contempt orders unless the people suing the government pay money upfront, called a bond. In most cases, when someone sues the government for violating their rights, courts don’t require a bond, especially in civil rights cases. This new rule would change that and block judges from being able to punish government officials who break the law—unless that payment was made.
Legal experts are warning that if this rule becomes law, it would wipe out the power of thousands of existing court orders that protect people’s rights. That includes desegregation orders in the South, protections for asylum seekers, and other critical rulings. Officials in government would be able to ignore these rulings and get away with it, simply because no bond was posted at the start of the case.
There is a bit of hope. Senate Democrats are planning to challenge this rule because it was added to a bill in a sneaky way, and it has nothing to do with the budget. They think they can get the Senate parliamentarian—the official who decides what rules are allowed in certain types of bills—to remove it. If they succeed, the rule won’t be included in the final law.
But there’s also a reason to be worried. Republicans in the Senate have already ignored the parliamentarian once recently, when they struck down California’s clean air rules, even though it wasn’t supposed to be allowed. If they’re willing to break the rules for that, they might do it again to protect Trump administration officials from facing consequences in court.
All of this shows a troubling pattern: judges are trying to do their jobs and make sure laws are followed, but some lawmakers are working behind the scenes to take away their power, especially when those judges challenge or stand up to Trump and his policies. If this continues, it could weaken the entire legal system and make it much harder to hold government officials accountable when they abuse their power.
