WASHINGTON – There's a striking trend unfolding at federal courthouses across the nation: Judges appointed by both parties are issuing uncharacteristically scathing rebukes of theTrump administration's immigration enforcement efforts.
A seniordistrict judge in Texas blasted the administrationin January for what he described as an "ill-conceived and incompetently-implemented government pursuit of daily deportation quotas."
Minnesota's chief judge said in an order that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has "likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence." Another federal judge calledPresident Donald Trumpan "authoritarian" and accused the administration of trouncing on the First Amendment.
Fierce criticism from members of the judiciary – including judges appointed by Republican presidents – comes as the Trump administration expands its efforts to carry out the largest mass deportation in American history.
More:Communities push back as ICE moves to convert warehouses into detention facilities
After the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good by federal immigration agents (ICE), communities across the U.S. are protesting against Trump's surge of immigration enforcement actions.Pictured here, Demonstrators gather for a protest calling for the removal of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Jan. 30, 2026 in the Chinatown neighborhood of Washington, D.C. Protests were held across the United States in response to ICE enforcement activity." style="max-width:100%; height:auto; border-radius:6px; margin:10px 0;" loading="lazy" />
Hundreds of people gather to protest ICE at the corner of Palafox and Garden Streets in downtown Pensacola, Florida, on Jan. 30, 2026." style="max-width:100%; height:auto; border-radius:6px; margin:10px 0;" loading="lazy" /> 
'ICE Out' protests spark marches, confrontations across US
After the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good by federal immigration agents (ICE), communities across the U.S. areprotestingagainst Trump's surge of immigration enforcement actions.Pictured here, Demonstrators gather for a protest calling for the removal of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Jan. 30, 2026 in the Chinatown neighborhood of Washington, D.C. Protests were held across the United States in response to ICE enforcement activity.
Since returning to office, Trump and top administration officials have taken swift actions to intensify immigration enforcement, from surging federal agents to major U.S. cities to halting bond hearings for detained immigrants.
In response, a growing number of district court judges have criticized the administration in written opinions and in court, accusing ICE of knowingly violating hundreds of court orders and condemning the tactics used by federal officers during raids across the country.
The White House and Department of Homeland Security officials have pushed back, criticizing the judges as "activists," including some long supported by Republicans. In a statement, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said detainees receive proper due process and said the Trump administration is "more than prepared to handle the legal caseload" stemming from its immigration enforcement.
In emailed comments to USA TODAY, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson criticized the backlash from judges: "Federal judges swear to faithfully and impartially enforce the law, so it is appalling that these clearly biased lower courts continue to attempt to push their unlawful policy agendas from the bench.President Trumpwill continue to uphold his constitutional duty to enforce the law and implement the agenda he was elected on."
'Very likely unprecedented' rulings spark appeals
Arthur Hellman, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh and an expert on federal courts, reviewed the recent statements from district judges and said there doesn't appear to be a historical precedent.
"It's unusual and very likely unprecedented to see so many judges condemning executive branch actions in such strong language in such a short period of time," he said.
Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia and an expert on immigration, agreed that the heated language from district judges is unusual. But she noted that the Trump administration has gone further than any other in modern history to test the bounds of its authority.
Meanwhile, some notable district court judges have ruled in favor of the administration. On Feb. 9, Judge Christina A. Snyder in Los Angeles, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, blocked California's law prohibiting federal agents from wearing masks, describing it as unconstitutional because it did not apply to all law enforcement officers.
But when the Trump administration has faced resistance from district judges, it has seen at least temporary wins by appealing the rulings.
So far in February, two separate appeals courts have sided with the federal government, allowing authorities to deny bond hearings to detained immigrants – including those with no criminal history – and permitting the administration to move forward with ending deportation protections for more than 60,000 migrants from Nepal, Honduras and Nicaragua.
The successful appeal regarding deportation protections followed a scathing order from District Judge Trina Thompson in San Francisco, who accusedHomeland Security Secretary Kristi Noemof making racist remarks that "perpetuate the discriminatory belief that certain immigrant populations will replace the white population."
'Not above the law'
U.S. District Court Judge Jerry Blackwell is among several judges in Minnesota who've voiced frustration over what he described as the Trump administration's consistent violation of court orders stemming from immigration cases.
In a hearing on Feb. 3, Blackwell, who was appointed by former PresidentJoe Biden, threatened to hold lawyers representing the federal government in contempt in an extraordinary back and forth.
Julie Le, an ICE attorney who was brought in to help the Justice Department with its caseload in Minnesota, where ICE had launched its largest immigration operation in history, said she and her colleagues at the U.S. attorney's office were "overwhelmed," according to a transcript.
"When I started with the job, I have to be honest, we have no guidance on what we need to do," she told the judge, adding that trying to get a response from ICE about a needed correction was like "pulling teeth."
"The system sucks. This job sucks," she said, later adding: "Sometimes I wish you would just hold me in contempt, your honor, so that I can have a full 24 hours of sleep."
Federal agents continue surge of immigration enforcement in Minnesota
Blackwell stated that "a court order is not advisory, and it is not conditional."
"Detention without lawful authority is not just a technical defect, it is a constitutional injury that unfairly falls on the heads of those who have done nothing wrong to justify it. The individuals affected are people. The overwhelming majority of the hundreds seen by this court have been found to be lawfully present as of now in the country. They live in their communities. Some are separated from their families," Blackwell said.
"The DOJ, the DHS, and ICE are not above the law. They do wield extraordinary power, and that power has to exist within constitutional limits," Blackwell went on. "When court orders are not followed, it's not just the court's authority that's at issue. It is the rights of individuals in custody and the integrity of the constitutional system itself."
Le was removed from her post at the U.S. attorney's office in Minnesota, multiple news outlets reported. A DHS spokesperson described Le's remarks as "unprofessional and unbecoming" but did not say whether she had returned to her former position at ICE.
'ICE is not a law unto itself'
In January, Minnesota's Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz, an appointee of President George W. Bush, threatened to hold ICE's Acting Director Todd Lyons in contempt over court order violations.
Advertisement
"The Court's patience is at an end," he wrote in an order filed on Jan. 26, writing that the administration had ignored "dozens" of orders compelling immigration authorities to provide bond hearings for people detained in Minneapolis.
Following his sharply worded order summoning Lyons to appear in court and explain ICE's actions, the immigrant at the center of the case was released from detention. As a result, Schiltz canceled the hearing but said he was still concerned about violations in other cases.
"Attached to this order is an appendix that identifies 96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases," Schiltz wrote. "This list should give pause to anyone—no matter his or her political beliefs—who cares about the rule of law."
"ICE is not a law unto itself," he added. "ICE has every right to challenge the orders of this Court, but, like any litigant, ICE must follow those orders unless and until they are overturned or vacated."
Days earlier, Schiltz sparred with the Trump administration after the Department of Justice asked an appeals court to force Schiltz to decide whether to issue arrest warrants for five people in connection with a protest at a Church in St. Paul, includingformer CNN anchor Don Lemon.
Schiltz said he surveyed all the chief judges in the Eighth Circuit and found that none had ever seen such a request, which he described as "frivolous" in a letter to the circuit's chief judge, Steven Colloton.
Hellman said Schiltz was appointed to the bench in 2006 with "an extraordinary good reputation." Schiltz started his professional career as a clerk for the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin G. Scalia and years later taught Justice Amy Coney Barrett at Notre Dame.
"For somebody with that background and that temperament to write something in such strong language is quite extraordinary," Hellman said, noting Schiltz's Senate confirmation was supported by Republican and Democratic senators alike.
Schiltz is not the only Republican-appointed federal judge who has come out against the administration's immigration enforcement efforts.
In January, U.S. District Judge Clay Land, a Bush appointee, wrote in a court order that the Trump administration was refusing to provide bond hearings to detained migrants despite his "definitive rulings" that they do so. He described the backlog of immigration cases as a "administrative judicial emergency."
On Jan. 14, Judge William Young, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, called Trump an "authoritarian" and said his administration "conspired to infringe" on the First Amendment rights of pro-Palestinian activists who the government has targeted for deportation.
"There doesn't seem to be an understanding of what the First Amendment is by this government," Young said.
White House spokesperson Ann Kelly on Fox News Digitalaccused Youngof engaging in "left-wing activism." In a statement to USA TODAY, the Department of Homeland Security said "We expect a higher court to vindicate us in this."
Judge cites the Bible and Thomas Jefferson in rebuke
Among the most stunning orders chastising the Trump administration was penned by U.S. District Judge Fred Biery, a Clinton appointee.
Invoking the Constitution and scripture, the Texas district court judge penned a scathing opinion ordering therelease of 5-year-old Liam Ramosand his father after the two were detained outside their home in Minneapolis in January.
"The case has its genesis in the ill-conceived and incompetently-implemented government pursuit of daily deportation quotas, apparently even if it requires traumatizing children," Biery wrote.
"Apparent also is the government's ignorance of an American historical document called the Declaration of Independence," he added.
Biery compared the administration's actions to those of King George III cited by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence.
"Thirty-three-year-old Thomas Jefferson enumerated grievances against a would-be authoritarian king over our nascent nation ... 'We the people' are hearing echoes of that history," Biery wrote.
Biery's order also included an image of Ramos with a blue bunny hat and a Spider-Man backpack as a masked agent stands behind him – an image that came to symbolize the Trump administration's aggressive immigration enforcement efforts.
Under the image, Biery cited the Bible passages Matthew 19:14 and John 11:35, recalling Jesus Christ's reply to his disciples when they attempted to prevent children from approaching him. The second citation refers to Jesus Christ's reaction to seeing the tomb of Lazarus.
"And Jesus wept," the passage says.
After the order, Liam and his father returned home to Columbia Heights, Minnesota. The Trump administration has since attempted to expedite their deportation, but a judge on Feb. 6 granted the family a continuance, allowing them more time to make their case for asylum.
Contributing: Reuters
Christopher Cann is a national breaking news reporter for USA TODAY. Contact him via email at ccann@usatoday.com.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Judges keep bashing ICE. Here are their harshest comments.
