Please click here to opt in to receive the Executive Functions Roundup via email and to subscribe to Executive Functions.
Judge Boasberg on Wednesday found probable cause that the government defendants’ actions in the Alien Enemies Act case constituted contempt. He ordered that if the defendants choose to “purge their contempt,” they must file by April 23 “a declaration explaining the steps they have taken and will take to do so,” and that if they choose not to purge their contempt, they must file by the same date “declaration(s) identifying the individual(s) who, with knowledge of the Court’s classwide Temporary Restraining Order, made the decision not to halt the transfer of class members out of U.S. custody on March 15 and 16, 2025.” The government noticed its appeal to the D.C. Circuit of Judge Boasberg’s contempt ruling. (Order.) (Opinion.) (Notice of appeal.)
The government on Wednesday asked the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the district court’s amended injunction directing the government to “take all available steps to facilitate” Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s return; to “grant mandamus to direct the District Court to vacate its capacious discovery order”; and for an immediate administrative say. The appeals court requested a response from Garcia by 5:00 pm today. The government on Wednesday also requested an administrative stay in the district court. (Motion for stay in the Fourth Circuit.) (Motion for stay in the district court.)
A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday administratively stayed the parts of a district court ruling that would have (1) enabled or required Citibank to disburse, transfer, or make available funds from certain grant awards and (2) compelled defendants to file a status report describing compliance with the court’s order within 24 hours. (Environmental Protection Agency and Citibank defendants had filed status reports in the district court before the appeals court issued a stay.) Judge Naomi Rao would have stayed the court’s injunction in full. See the district court order in yesterday’s Roundup. (Appeals court order.) (Citibank status report.) (EPA status report.) (District court opinion accompanying injunction.)
Judge Sunshine Sykes (C.D.Cal.) on Wednesday enjoined the government from removing a Venezuelan man who had filed a habeas petition from an immigration detention facility and “from transporting Petitioner outside of Adelanto, California without an Order from the Court.” Judge Sykes found that the order was necessary “to prevent the immediate and irreparable injury that may occur with the immediate removal of any Venezuelan alien subject to the Proclamation.” (Order.)
The Trump administration has reportedly asked the Internal Revenue Service to initiate the process of revoking Harvard’s tax-exempt status. (WSJ.)
Benjamin Wittes analyzed the government’s options in responding to Judge Boasberg’s contempt finding. (Lawfare.)
Steve Vladeck argued, in light of Judge Boasberg’s contempt finding, that the rule that would permit the court to hire a private special prosecutor to try a contempt case against government officials is likely unconstitutional. (One First.)
Richard Re argued that the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States should not be tossed into the “anti-canon.” He contended, among other things, that there was significant precedent for taking functional considerations seriously in the immunity context, and that the claims of likely presidential lawlessness following the decision are overstated—as the protection against prosecution afforded by the opinion is “indeterminate.” (Divided Argument.)
Ross Douthat and Jack Goldsmith had a wide-ranging conversation about the state of executive power in Trump 2.0. (Interesting Times.)
Nick Bednar contended that there’s growing evidence that the Trump administration “has created a toolkit to rescind regulations without the required procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act or the involvement of the experts who understand the purpose of these regulations.” (Lawfare.)
Jack Greenberg and John Dearborn analyzed how the administration’s aggressiveness and the Supreme Court’s separation-of-powers jurisprudence have combined to dramatically disrupt Congress’s reliance on presidential self-restraint. (Lawfare.)
Nancy Morawetz argued that there are serious procedural and substantive legal problems with the Trump administration’s interim final rule obligating noncitizens to register with the government. (Just Security.)
Pending Emergency Order Applications Involving the U.S. Government in the Supreme Court
Donald Trump v. Gwynne A. Wilcox: Government filed application on April 9 to stay pending appeal district court injunctions. Chief Justice Roberts on April 9 stayed district court injunctions. Plaintiffs filed responses to the government’s application on April 15. Government filed reply on April 16.
Trump v. Washington: Government filed application on March 13 to stay pending appeal district court injunction. Plaintiffs filed response to application on April 4. Government filed reply on April 7.
Trump v. New Jersey: Government filed application on March 13 to stay pending appeal district court injunction. Plaintiffs filed response to application on April 4. Government filed reply on April 7.
Trump v. CASA: Government filed application on March 13 to stay pending appeal district court injunction. Plaintiffs filed response to application on April 4. Government filed reply on April 7.