Federal Judge dismisses DOJ lawsuit aimed at all 15 Maryland federal judges
(August 26, 2025) Earlier today, a federal judge dismissed the Department of Justice’s unprecedented lawsuit against all 15 federal judges in Maryland. The DOJ had challenged a standing order by Chief Judge George L. Russell III that temporarily paused deportations for migrants filing habeas corpus petitions. The Trump administration argued this order unlawfully interfered with executive immigration enforcement
U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen, appointed by Trump and specially assigned to the case, ruled that the lawsuit violated constitutional norms. He emphasized that disputes between branches must be resolved through proper legal channels – not by suing an entire judiciary. Cullen wrote that such litigation “would run counter to overwhelming precedent, depart from longstanding constitutional tradition, and offend the rule of law”
Prominent legal voices, including Supreme Court advocate Paul Clement, representing the judges, criticized the suit as lacking precedent, emphasizing that the executive branch suing a co-equal branch of government violates foundational principles. Clement argued that the DOJ should have pursued appeals in individual cases or petitioned the judicial council instead.
As of this writing, the White House has not commented, and the DOJ has yet to issue a formal response.
The DOJ’s lawsuit against the Maryland federal judiciary stemmed from a standing order issued by Chief Judge George Russell III in May 2025. This order temporarily barred the deportation of immigrants for two business days if they filed a habeas corpus petition challenging their detention. The DOJ argued that this amounted to an automatic injunction against the federal government, issued outside the context of any specific case, and claimed it unlawfully restrained executive authority
The lawsuit named all 15 federal judges in Maryland as defendants, an unprecedented move that raised constitutional concerns. The DOJ asserted that the judiciary had overstepped its bounds by instituting a blanket policy that interfered with immigration enforcement without individualized judicial review
The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen from Virginia, since all Maryland judges were recused. Cullen dismissed the suit, stating that the executive cannot sue the judiciary over its exercise of judicial power, and that such disputes must be resolved through appeals or judicial councils—not litigation
Professor Mark Graber of the University of Maryland Law School noted that while the standing order by Chief Judge George Russell III was novel, the proper response would have been a legal appeal – not a sweeping lawsuit against all judges. He described the DOJ’s approach as “showboating,” suggesting it undermines judicial independence.
Constitutional law professor Josh Blackman acknowledged the lawsuit’s unusual nature but believed it was the Trump administration’s only viable path to challenge the policy comprehensively. Still, he admitted the order itself might not survive Supreme Court scrutiny
For more on the unprecedented DOJ lawsuit against Maryland’s 15 judges, see the video accompanying this article.
.
Sources:
Posted by Richard Webster, Ace News Today
Follow Richard on Facebook, Twitter & Instagram
