Trump DOJ Criticizes Judge for ‘Wrongfully’ Holding JAG Lawyer’s Career Hostage: How a Contempt Ruling Compelled ICE Compliance in 24 Hours

The Trump administration has raised objections, asserting that a federal judge misused her contempt authority against a temporary Department of Justice attorney, compelling Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to expedite adherence to a court directive in a Minnesota habeas corpus case.

On Monday, the Department of Justice appealed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, contending that U.S. District Judge Laura Provinzino’s recent decision to hold a Judge Advocate General’s Corps attorney in civil contempt was “manifestly improper.” This action was allegedly used as a pressure tactic to ensure the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and ICE complied with court orders, and the DOJ is seeking to have it overturned.

Judge Provinzino, appointed by former President Joe Biden, had previously instructed in early February that a Mexican resident of Minnesota, deemed “unlawfully detained,” be released from ICE custody in El Paso, Texas. The man, who had lived with his lawful permanent resident spouse in Minnesota since 2018, was ordered to be returned to his home state. However, upon his release, Rigoberto Soto Jimenez was without his Minnesota driver’s license or Mexican Consulate ID and was not transported back to Minnesota as mandated.

With the situation unresolved for over a week, Judge Provinzino questioned special assistant U.S. attorney Matthew Isihara about the government’s non-compliance. Isihara, overwhelmed with 130 cases in a month amidst staffing issues during Operation Metro Surge, apologized, stating the oversight had “fallen through the cracks.”

Following a hearing on February 18, Judge Provinzino found Isihara in civil contempt, imposing a daily coercive fine of $500 starting February 20. This fine was to continue until Isihara could file documentation proving compliance with the court’s order.

Provinzino’s order did not come out of nowhere, as just weeks earlier a DHS attorney helping out at the U.S. Attorney’s Office made national headlines by asking a different frustrated judge to hold her in contempt so she could get some sleep. One week after the contempt order against Isihara, the chief judge of the court spoke out, said neither judges nor lawyers “deserve” the “impossible” situation DOJ “superiors” unleashed, and threatened to use criminal contempt to force compliance if need be.

Ultimately, as the DOJ’s own appellate filing recounted, Isihara was not fined a single dollar — because the government just one day after Provinzino’s order confirmed that Jimenez’s property was returned, purging the contempt.

In case that series of events left the impression that Provinzino’s action was simple and effective, the DOJ made sure to tell the 8th Circuit not to be fooled. Rather, Provinzino “held” Isihara’s career “captive” and subjected him to potential “permanent professional consequences” in an “improper attempt to coerce the defendant federal agency into speedier compliance with an order against that agency,” the filing said.

“Petitioner emphasizes that ICE promptly came into compliance with the court’s habeas order and that the court declared the contempt order purged before Mr. Isihara paid any daily fines. But that only underscores the problem: the fact that the court held a personal-capacity contempt order against Mr. Isihara purged based on compliance by his client makes clear that Mr. Isihara and his legal career were wrongfully held captive to induce ICE’s compliance,” the DOJ asserted. “That ICE complied before Mr. Isihara was forced to incur personal-capacity fines should not perversely immunize the court’s improper order from review. Normally, a party facing civil contempt has the option of complying, thereby purging the contempt, or continuing to resist and seeking further review. Mr. Isihara, however, lacked that choice because—to state the obvious—a SAUSA in the District of Minnesota does not control ICE.”

In a parting shot, the DOJ accused the judge of abusing her authority and invited the 8th Circuit to stop her from using contempt “as a weapon” and “as a wedge to set an attorney against his own client.”

“It would be entirely appropriate for this Court to exercise its supervisory authority to prevent district court judges from deploying personal-capacity contempt sanctions against government attorneys as a weapon to influence ICE or other agencies,” the filing said.