Trump DOJ Says Judges Waged ‘Partisan Press Campaign’ Over ICE Operation - Newsweek

Seven federal judges in Minnesota are facing misconduct investigations over their comments to the media about the Trump administration's immigration enforcement operation in the state, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) announced Wednesday.

U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said the DOJ was asking the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to consider whether comments by Patrick J. Schiltz, a President George W. Bush appointee, and John R. Tunheim, appointed by President Bill Clinton, violated judicial rules on commenting on active cases.

Five other justices were not named in the complaint, which outlines the DOJ's concerns around interviews the group gave to The New York Times for a September 17 article about the surge in Minneapolis and St. Paul earlier this year, in which Schiltz described the operation as a threat to democracy.

The Times article was based around a sit-down interview with Schiltz, after he used strong language in court orders relating to Operation Metro Surge earlier this year, during which thousands of federal agents descended on the Twin Cities to arrest alleged illegal immigrants, locals pushed back through widespread protests, and two U.S. citizens were fatally shot by ICE and CBP officers.

As part of the interview, Schiltz said that if there was no rule of law, then the United States was effectively faced with anarchy or authoritarianism, and gave Russia, China, and North Korea as examples.

"If anything is a 'grave threat to the rule of law,' it is judges who repeatedly and brazenly exceed their authority—then launch a partisan press campaign that includes criticizing the government for filing an emergency appeal when a judge refused torule on a search warrant application," the DOJ complaint read.

Shiltz stood by his interview, telling Newsweek that he was acting "well within the ethical rules that apply to federal judges" when speaking to the Times.

"Indeed, in February of this year, the Committee on Codes of Conduct issued an advisory opinion to emphasize that federal judges may 'speak and writ[e] on core judiciary matters such as advocacy for the rule of law and judicial independence.' That is exactly what I did," he said.

The DOJ pointed Newsweek to the complaint when reached for comment.

Blanche said during the Wednesday morning press briefing, which was initially about alleged voter fraud, that the judges had broken the laws governing how federal judges operate, particularly when it comes to pending cases.

The complaint filed to the Eighth Circuit repeatedly cites Canon 2A of the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges, which says they should act in a way that promotes public confidence in the judiciary's integrity and impartiality.

By speaking to the Times, the DOJ argued, the judges appeared to have taken sides in disputes involving the Trump administration and were advocating policy positions rather than neutrally deciding on cases.

A central theme of the DOJ's complaint is that judges should remain "above the fray" by avoiding doing anything that could cause the public to question their neutrality. This also applies to pending cases, with DOJ said, pointing to another section of the code of conduct which covers comments on cases still underway, such as those stemming from Operation Metro Surge.

The DOJ is asking the judges on the list—most of the Minnesota District Court bench—to recuse themselves from any cases linked to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) while the investigation takes place.

Shiltz wrote in a January 28 order that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was "not a law unto itself," after the agency allegedly violated nearly 100 orders issued by the Minnesota District Court that month alone.

In his 90-minute interview with the Times, Shiltz said his strongly worded order was born out of a concern that the Trump administration's disregard for court orders was bringing his courtroom to a halt, as it was clogged with pending cases.

During the interview, Shiltz said he could not talk about specific cases but argued that judges were able to talk about the rule of law, "and to defend the rule of law." He said what had happened in Minnesota earlier this year was unprecedented.

Shiltz was not alone in speaking to the Times. Judge Nancy E. Brasel, who was appointed by President Donald Trump during his first term, defended their right to speak.

“We are allowed to speak out about judicial independence and so we should, in order to keep it," she told the outlet.

The judges watched as the ICE operation unfolded on the streets of Minneapolis and St. Paul. While DHS insisted it was going after the "worst of the worst," Tunheim disputed that line, telling the Times that he did not feel agents were arresting dangerous people.

"If you are an immigrant here and you are a dangerous criminal, then you are in prison, because you've been prosecuted," Tunheim said. "So, there was no need to go hunt those people down because they were committing crimes, it was just not the case."

The judges also detailed violent threats they received after major rulings, and the feeling they were on their own without the support from the DOJ in Washington.

"Reporting by The New York Times on concerns among federal judges about the conduct of the Justice Department highlights the importance of public officials stepping up to shed light on governmental actions," Charlie Stadtlander, executive director of Media Relations & Communications at The New York Times, told Newsweek in a statement. "Seeking to punish or silence those who speak up to journalists about any administration's agenda undercuts democratic accountability and the public's right to know."

Blanche was questioned by reporters over his own public comments, including remarks he made in November 2025 when, as deputy attorney general, he urged young attorneys to join the Trump administration's war on "rogue activist judges."

"We need you, because it is a war, and it's something we will not win unless we keep on fighting," Blanche said at an annual Federalist Society conference.

On Wednesday, Blanche was asked about these remarks and how they differed from what the Minnesota judges had said in broad terms about the administration.

"Well, there could not be a bigger difference. It turns out I'm not a judge. It turns out I'm not bound by the judicial canons, OK?" Blanche responded. "I'm allowed to fight for my prosecutors. I'm allowed to get really fired up when, for example, judges in Minnesota complained about us violating court orders."

Another reporter then questioned Blanche about participating in what she called "partisan activities," such as appearing at political rallies for the Republican Party, despite long-running precedent for the sitting DOJ chief not to do so.

"I go and I talk about how great it is that we're bringing crime down...the great things this president is doing. If Democrats want me to come and speak at their rally, they can just give me a call," Blanche said. "I have the same thing to say to them that I say to any rally, which is that that we're fighting to make America safe again and that we're every day we're going back to the basics of law enforcement."

The reporter responded that Blanche does not really have his own time, that wherever he goes, he is the attorney general, and that is what the public sees when he appears at a rally.

"The law says that that the Attorney General, the Secretary of War, the Treasury secretary, we are allowed to do things in our individual capacity. So, I appreciate the media message that everywhere you go, you're the Attorney General, but unfortunately, that's not what the statute says," he said. "So, I am allowed to go and support administrative priorities, in my personal capacity."

Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Gabe Whisnant and Sam Wilson.