BALTIMORE – A federal judge in Baltimore cleared the way for potential contempt proceedings to be brought against the Trump administration on Tuesday after it failed to comply with a court order requiring it to return a deported Venezuelan migrant from El Salvador back to U.S. soil.
The update from U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher capped an extraordinary court hearing centered on the status and location of “Cristian,” a 20-year-old Venezuelan migrant who was deported to El Salvador’s CECOT maximum-security prison in March, as part of the Trump administration’s early wave of Alien Enemies Act deportation flights.
Gallagher told Cristian’s lawyers on Tuesday that the flurry of recent updates in the case could allow plaintiffs to potentially move on sanctions or possible contempt proceedings against the Trump administration, though she stressed she was not opining on whether the effort would be successful.
“I don’t disagree that you have proffered a basis under which you could potentially seek some sort of sanctions or contempt” against the administration, Gallagher said. “I’m certainly not ruling on that – or offering any opinion on whether that effort would succeed – but it sounds to me that you have proffered a basis on which you believe such a motion could possibly be forthcoming.”
FEDERAL JUDGE EXTENDS ARGUMENTS IN ABREGO GARCIA CASE, SLAMS ICE WITNESS WHO ‘KNEW NOTHING’
⚖️ Legal Showdown: Court Orders and Defiance
- A federal judge in Baltimore, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher, declared that the Trump administration may face contempt proceedings for failing to comply with her court order to return Cristian, a 20-year-old Venezuelan migrant deported to El Salvador’s CECOT prison despite being protected under asylum settlement terms.
- Judge Gallagher emphasized that Cristian’s removal violated a binding 2023 settlement stipulating that migrants with pending asylum claims must not be deported until due process is complete. She specifically noted that Cristian was removed in direct violation of that agreement .
Cristian’s Return & Refugee Status
- In a controversial move, Cristian was later deported to Venezuela as part of a prisoner exchange, which included the release of 10 U.S. citizens held in Venezuela.
- This transfer has been strongly criticized by Cristian’s legal team, who said it constituted an “egregious violation” of court orders and undermines his right to asylum, as he has now been sent back to the same country from which he fled.
🔍 Deeper Context – Legal Battles & Related Cases
- District Judge James Boasberg previously found probable cause to pursue criminal contempt charges against the administration for the deportation of over 130 Venezuelan migrants using the Alien Enemies Act, despite his explicit injunction to halt their removal .
- The case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, another asylum seeker wrongly deported to El Salvador, similarly raised serious concerns. Judge Paula Xinis is also considering contempt proceedings unless the government complies fully with court instructions on his return and processing.
- A recent Washington Post investigation revealed that the Trump administration may have defied court rulings in about 35% of over 160 cases where judges ruled against them, heightening concerns over erosion of judicial authority
- Cristian’s attorneys, led by Kevin DeJong, plan to file motions for criminal contempt or sanctions within 10 days. The deadline is intended to compel the administration to justify or rectify its conduct.
- Despite the administration’s claims that it’s ready to facilitate Cristian’s return if he wishes, Gallagher has made it clear that no travel has been arranged, and she expects weekly status updates on his whereabouts and efforts toward compliance .
- Meanwhile, Judge Boasberg may launch live witness testimony and other discovery to identify who directed the flights to continue, despite clear orders to turn back planes carrying affected migrants .
The case highlights a growing standoff over whether the judiciary can enforce its orders against executive defiance. It raises crucial questions about due process, asylum protections, and the integrity of the U.S. legal system.