DOJ files judicial misconduct claim against Minnesota judges after New York Times interviews

The Justice Department has asked a federal appeals court to sanction nearly the entire bench of the U.S. District Court in Minnesota, alleging judicial misconduct over remarks made to a newspaper. According to MS NOW · CBS News, the complaint, lodged Wednesday with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, is unprecedented. It stems from a September 17 New York Times story describing how the court has coped with the upheaval surrounding the administration's immigration crackdown in Minneapolis.

Named in the filing are Judge Patrick Schiltz, a George W. Bush appointee, and Judge John Tunheim, appointed by Bill Clinton, plus several judges who spoke without being identified. The department wants them barred from every case, criminal or civil, that involves the Department of Homeland Security. Such a step would leave just one active judge in the district eligible, though it was unclear which one. Immigration lawsuits have flooded the court, largely because of last winter's enforcement surge.

Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter announced the filing on X, describing the interviews as "an unethical partisan press tour." The complaint calls Schiltz's remarks "outrageous" and says Tunheim's were "equally unethical." Schiltz had said the administration's defiance of court orders threatened the rule of law, while Tunheim said those being arrested were not, in his view, dangerous criminals.

The Justice Department argues the judges broke two canons of federal judicial conduct: one on promoting public confidence in the judiciary's integrity and impartiality, and one barring public comment on pending matters.

Summarized by PolitiKool from MS NOW · CBS News’s reporting. Read the full story at MS NOW · CBS News →