Judges warn Trump risks public perception of lawlessness in his fight with courts

By Luc Cohen, Jack Queen and Tom Hals

A U.S. appeals court urged the Trump administration on Thursday to back off from its escalating confrontation with the judiciary while upholding a judge's order to facilitate the return of a man wrongly deported to El Salvador.

"The executive will lose much from a public perception of its lawlessness," U.S. Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote on behalf of a three-judge panel. The executive branch in the U.S. Constitution refers to the president.

"We yet cling to the hope that it is not naïve to believe our good brethren in the Executive Branch perceive the rule of law as vital to the American ethos."

Wilkinson is an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, a Republican like President Donald Trump.

In a strongly worded unanimous opinion, the panel of the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Trump appeared to be trying to harm public opinion of the judiciary with his frequent invective against judges who rule against him. The panel said he might succeed, but warned his anti-judiciary campaign may backfire if the public begins to doubt he is following the law.

In its ruling, the Richmond, Virginia-based panel rejected the administration's request to stop U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis from probing what the government had done to secure the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a migrant it acknowledged having deported to El Salvador by mistake.

Asked to comment on the appeals court decision, a Justice Department spokesperson referred to Attorney General Pam Bondi's posts on X on Monday and Wednesday asserting that Abrego Garcia belonged to the MS-13 street gang.

An immigration judge in 2019 granted Abrego Garcia protection from deportation to El Salvador after finding he was likely to be persecuted by gangs if returned there, court records show.

Abrego Garcia's lawyers and family members deny he was part of MS-13.

"I was elected to get rid of those criminals, to get them out of our country," Trump told reporters at the White House on Thursday when asked about Abrego Garcia. "I don't see how judges can take that authority away from a president."

JUDGES CITE LACK OF DUE PROCESS

The panel of judges said Trump's claim to have the right to deport people "without due process and in disregard of court orders" would have implications beyond Abrego Garcia's case.

"What assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home?" Wilkinson wrote, citing Trump's suggestion on Monday that U.S.-born criminals could also be sent to prisons in El Salvador, an act experts say would violate U.S. law.

"And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies?" the judge wrote.

Legal experts said the appeals court's unusually strong language for a simple procedural decision was aimed at a broader public audience. "The implications of this are terrifying for American democracy,” said Laura Dickinson, a professor at George Washington University Law School.

On Tuesday, Xinis ordered U.S. officials to provide documents and answer questions under oath about what they had done to secure the return of Abrego Garcia, who was sent to El Salvador on March 15. The judge has also ordered the administration to facilitate his return.

"It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter," Wilkinson wrote. "But in this case, it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order."

The Trump administration faces more than 200 legal challenges to its policies. Democrats and some legal analysts say officials in some cases are dragging their feet in complying with unfavorable court orders, signaling a potential willingness to disobey an independent, coequal branch of government.

In a separate case, Trump called for the impeachment of a judge who blocked some deportations to El Salvador. That prompted a rare rebuke from U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts, who said appeals, not impeachment, are the proper response to adverse court decisions.

The judiciary is not the only U.S. institution to come under pressure. The Trump administration has targeted others that have long cherished their independence from partisan politics, such as universities and law firms.