BALTIMORE — The Chief judge for the United States District Court of Maryland on Thursday issued an order some law experts are calling "crazy."
Judge George L. Russell III, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, is attempting to bar the Trump Administration from removing any and all illegal immigrants from the country, the minute they file a Habeas Corpus petition in Maryland.
Known as a standing order, Russell's ruling doesn't stem from a particular Habeas case, but applies to any brought in the future.
Despite acknowledging his court may not have proper jurisdiction for such claims, Russell reasons pre-injunctions are necessary anyway.
"In order to preserve existing conditions and the potential jurisdiction of this Court over pending matters while the Court determines the scope of its authority to grant the request relief; to ensure Petitioners are able to participate in the adjudication of their requests for habeas relief, including participation in court proceedings and access to legal counsel for such purpose; to ensure the Court is able to evaluate their respective claims for relief based on their in-court testimony that may be offered; and to ensure the Government has a fulsome opportunity to brief and present arguments in its defense," writes Russell.
Under Russell's order, the government would be banned from carrying out any contested deportations for at least two business days.
"Upon the filing of a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on behalf of an alien detainee, the Government/Respondents, including all those acting for them or on their behalf, are enjoined and restrained from removing Petitioners in such cases from the continental United States or altering their legal status," Russell's order reads.
The order drew quick criticism from multiple attorneys specializing in constitutional law.
"So, visa holder is arrested for an act of terrorism in D.C., and they file a habeas in Maryland, the government automatically can't revoke visa," asked Margot Cleveland, a Notre Dame Law School graduate who clerked decades on the federal Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. "I truly can't express how lawless & crazy this is!"
Trent McCotter, a former United States Deputy Associate Attorney General, echoed Cleveland's remarks.
"There used to be a joke about liberal judges one day issuing a standing order that says "any motion for an injunction against Trump is hereby granted in advance," McCotter wrote on X. "Looks like someone actually did it."
McCotter further suggested Russell's order violates Supreme Court precedent, specifically the case Nken v. Holder.
Josh Blackman, a constitutional law professor at the South Texas College of Law Houston, chimed in stating "Am I reading this right?"
"If a lawyer files a conforming habeas petition, an injunction is automatically entered blocking the removal of the alien. The merits are irrelevant. And this injunction applies to the government, writ large. Has anyone ever seen an order like this before" Blackman opined. "This order is pretty clearly designed to thwart the Trump Administration's immigration policies. I can't imagine this order would remain in effect if a different President is in the White House."
WMAR-2 News reached out to the Department of Justice for reaction on Russell's ruling, and received a "no comment" response.
Habeas cases have returned to the national spotlight since President Trump retook the White House in January.
During his Presidential campaign, Trump vowed to deport migrants illegally in the U.S. with prior criminal records.
Since then the U.S. has sent several deportation flights to African and Central American nations.
One person aboard those flights was Kilmar Abrego-Garcia, an alleged MS-13 gang member living in Maryland, who ICE deported back in April.
Garcia, who denies being in a gang, filed a lawsuit claiming due process violations.
The feds argued Garcia already had an immigration hearing a few years ago, at which time an immigration judge said he could be removed from the country, but not to El Salvador due to potential safety concerns.
Judge Paula Xinis, another Obama appointed judge in Maryland, sided against the government ordering them to "effectuate" Abrego-Garcia's return.
The Supreme Court later stepped in on appeal, ruling the administration must "facilitate his release."
There's now an ongoing court battle between the Executive and Judicial branches on what that exactly means.
So far, the feds have refused to allow Garcia's return, painting him as a "gangbanger" and "human trafficker."
Garcia is just one of many undocumented migrants who've challenged their removal under Trump's declaration of the 1800s era Alien Enemies Act.
Another Maryland judge, Stephanie Gallagher, who Trump renominated after her initial appointment by Obama expired, recently ordered the return of a second man who claims to have been wrongfully deported.
Three more federal judges, in Massachusetts, Texas, and Washington D.C., have each ordered the government to pause further deportations under the Alien Enemies Act.
Two of the three, James Boasberg, an Obama appointee in D.C., and Brian Murphy, a Biden nominee in Massachusetts, have threatened to hold the government in criminal contempt for allegedly violating their orders.
Meanwhile, a fourth judge in Pennsylvania, appointed by Trump, ruled in favor of the Administration, but emphasized migrants should be given reasonable notice of their removal, allowing them time to contest it.
A divided Supreme Court has since extended a temporary halt on deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, but made clear removals could be carried out under other lawful means.
So far dozens of migrants who've sued have not yet been returned, as ordered, as litigation continues to play out.
Trump and his allies have heavily criticized district level judges blocking his agenda, leading to separation of powers concerns.
Critics like Elon Musk have openly supported the idea of Trump defying and ignoring court orders.
Legal experts generally believe courts have no true enforcement mechanism against a sitting President with sweeping immunity and control of the DOJ whose job it is to implement judicial orders.
A pair of GOP Congressmen even filed articles of impeachment against certain judges over unrelated anti-Trump rulings, including one here in Maryland, although their efforts are all but certain to fail considering Republicans currently lack a Senate super majority.
