On Friday, after U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order halting the deportation of Venezuelan nationals—and after the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision—the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to intervene.

In her message to the Supreme Court, U.S. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris said the “flawed” orders from Boasberg “threaten the government’s sensitive negotiations with foreign powers” and risk “serious and perhaps irreparable harm if not immediately reviewed” by the Supreme Court, Fox News reported.

Boasberg blocked the Trump administration from invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport suspected Venezuelan gang members, ordering that more than 250 illegal aliens deported to El Salvador be returned and instructing that the planes be turned around.

However, the Trump administration immediately appealed the ruling, arguing that Trump’s use of the law was not subject to Boasberg’s order “because the presidential actions they challenge are not subject to judicial review,” adding that their actions were not violative because “the relevant flights left U.S. airspace” before the order and the planes were over international waters when it was issued.

Boasberg instructed the administration to provide additional details about the first two flights to El Salvador, including the times the planes left U.S. airspace and landed, and he mandated that the government respond.

In a filing, the DOJ wrote, “Continuing to beat a dead horse solely for the sake of prying from the Government legally immaterial facts and wholly within a sphere of core functions of the Executive Branch is both purposeless and frustrating to the consideration of the actual legal issues at stake in this case.”

The DOJ also argued that complying with Boasberg’s order exposed negotiations with other nations “to serious risk of micromanaged and unnecessary judicial fishing expeditions and potential public disclosure.”

Later that day, Boasberg gave the government one more day to respond while threatening “consequences,” writing:

To begin, the Court seeks this information, not as a “micromanaged and unnecessary judicial fishing expedition,” but to determine if the Government deliberately flouted its Orders issued on March 15, 2025, and, if so, what the consequences should be …

The D.C. Court of Appeals on Wednesday ruled 2-1 to uphold Boasberg’s ruling, leading the Trump administration to file an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court.