The U.S. Department of Justice on Sept. 30 filed a judicial misconduct complaint against several federal judges in Minnesota for comments they made to The New York Times about a surge in immigration enforcement. The complaint names Judges Patrick J. Schiltz and John R. Tunheim and says others spoke to the newspaper. DOJ says the judges' remarks were improperly political and requested an investigation and recusals from Department of Homeland Security-related cases. Schiltz says he acted within judicial ethics; Tunheim declined to comment.
DOJ Files Judicial Misconduct Complaint Over Minnesota Judges’ Comments to The New York Times
Thousands of protesters march in sub-zero temperatures during "ICE Out" day Jan. 23 to protest the federal government's immigration enforcement surge in Minneapolis. The Department of Justice filed a complaint Wednesday against federal judges who spoke to The New York Times about the surge. File Photo by Craig Lassig/UPI
Sept. 30 — The U.S. Department of Justice on Wednesday filed a formal complaint alleging judicial misconduct against several federal judges in Minnesota who spoke with The New York Times about an increase in immigration enforcement tied to the Trump administration.
The filing specifically names Judge Patrick J. Schiltz and Judge John R. Tunheim, and refers to additional participants as "Anonymous District Judges." According to the complaint, Schiltz took part in a 90-minute interview that formed part of an article published Sept. 17 titled, "Trump's Minnesota Surge Threatened Democracy, Judge Warns." The complaint also says six other federal judges in Minnesota spoke with the newspaper; Tunheim was quoted by name in the article.
In the interview, Schiltz told The New York Times that the Trump administration's actions "created a grave threat to the rule of law," adding that "the rule of law to democracy is like oxygen to a human body. It is something that you absolutely need to survive, and yet it's something that people just take for granted." The Times noted that Schiltz declined to discuss any ongoing cases during the interview.
The Justice Department's complaint counters that federal judges are "ethically prohibited from commenting publicly on cases pending in any court and making political or policy statements concerning matters that are or have been before them." At a news conference, Department officials — including a top Justice official identified in the filing — said the remarks demonstrated "obvious bias" and described them as "overtly political."
"Judges are ethically prohibited from commenting publicly on cases pending in any court and making political or policy statements concerning matters that are or have been before them," the complaint says.
The DOJ asked for a judicial investigation into the other federal judges who spoke with The New York Times and requested that Schiltz and Tunheim recuse themselves from any matters involving the Department of Homeland Security.
Schiltz issued a statement saying he believed he had "acted well within the ethical rules that apply to federal judges in speaking to The New York Times," citing a judicial committee opinion that allows judges to speak and write on "core judicial matters." "That is exactly what I did," he said.
Tunheim declined to comment on the complaint. In the Sept. 17 article, Tunheim questioned the Department of Homeland Security's characterization of its enforcement actions as targeted at "the worst of the worst," saying, "They weren't arresting, in my view, people who were dangerous criminals on the street."
The Justice Department's filing sets in motion a request for formal review and potential disciplinary action; the next steps include whether a judicial investigation will proceed and whether recusals will be required in related cases.
Help us improve.
