Trump administration's lawsuit against all of Maryland's federal judges
meets skepticism in court
[August 14, 2025]
By LEA SKENE
BALTIMORE (AP) — A judge on Wednesday questioned why it was necessary
for the Trump administration to sue Maryland’s entire federal bench over
an order that paused the immediate deportation of migrants challenging
their removals.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen didn’t issue a ruling following a
hearing in federal court in Baltimore, but he expressed skepticism about
the administration’s extraordinary legal maneuver, which attorneys for
the Maryland judges called completely unprecedented.
Cullen serves in the Western District of Virginia, but he was tapped to
oversee the Baltimore case because all of Maryland’s 15 federal judges
are named as defendants, a highly unusual circumstance that reflects the
Republican administration’s aggressive response to courts that slow or
stop its policies.
At issue in the lawsuit is an order signed by Chief Maryland District
Judge George L. Russell III that prevents the administration from
immediately deporting any immigrants seeking review of their detention
in a Maryland federal court. The order blocks their removal until 4 p.m.
on the second business day after their habeas corpus petition is filed.
The Justice Department, which filed the lawsuit in June, says the
automatic pause impedes President Donald Trump’s authority to enforce
immigration laws.
But attorneys for the Maryland judges argue that the suit was intended
to limit the power of the judiciary to review certain immigration
proceedings while the administration pursues a mass deportation agenda.

“The executive branch seeks to bring suit in the name of the United
States against a co-equal branch of government,” said Paul Clement, a
prominent conservative lawyer who served as Republican President George
W. Bush's solicitor general. “There really is no precursor for this
suit”
Clement listed several other avenues the administration could have taken
to challenge the order, such as filing an appeal in an individual habeas
case.
Cullen also asked the government’s lawyers whether they had considered
that alternative, which he said could have been more expeditious than
suing all the judges. He also questioned what would happen if the
administration accelerated its current approach and sued a federal
appellate bench, or even the Supreme Court.
“I think you probably picked up on the fact that I have some
skepticism,” Cullen told Justice Department attorney Elizabeth Themins
Hedges when she stood to present the Trump administration's case.
Hedges denied that the case would “open the floodgates” to similar
lawsuits. She said the government is simply seeking relief from a legal
roadblock preventing effective immigration enforcement.
[to top of second column]
|

U.S. Attorney Thomas Cullen, center, speaks with the media in
Charlottesville Federal Court in Charlottesville, Va, March 27,
2019. (Andrew Shurtleff/The Daily Progress via AP, File)

“The United States is a plaintiff here because the United States is
being harmed,” she said.
Cullen, who was nominated to the federal bench by Trump in 2020,
said he would issue a ruling by Labor Day on whether to dismiss the
lawsuit. If allowed to proceed, he could also grant the government’s
request for a preliminary injunction that would block the Maryland
federal bench from following the conditions of the chief judge’s
order.
The automatic pause in deportation proceedings sought to maintain
existing conditions and the potential jurisdiction of the court,
ensure immigrant petitioners are able to participate in court
proceedings and access attorneys and give the government “fulsome
opportunity to brief and present arguments in its defense,”
according to the order.
Russell also said the court had received an influx of habeas
petitions after hours that “resulted in hurried and frustrating
hearings in that obtaining clear and concrete information about the
location and status of the petitioners is elusive.” Habeas petitions
allow people to challenge their detention by the government.
The administration accused Maryland judges of prioritizing a regular
schedule, saying in court documents that “a sense of frustration and
a desire for greater convenience do not give Defendants license to
flout the law.”
Among the judges named in the lawsuit is Paula Xinis, who found the
administration illegally deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia to El
Salvador in March — a case that quickly became a flashpoint in
Trump’s immigration crackdown. Abrego Garcia was held in a notorious
Salvadoran megaprison, where he claims to have been beaten and
tortured.
The administration later brought Abrego Garcia back to the U.S. and
charged him with human smuggling in Tennessee. His attorneys
characterized the charge as an attempt to justify his erroneous
deportation. Xinis recently prohibited the administration from
taking Abrego Garcia into immediate immigration custody if he’s
released from jail pending trial.
All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved
 |