Published September 25, 2026 at 5:23 PM ET · Updated September 26, 2026 at 6:08 AM ET
Judge holds DHS in contempt for deportation, orders return of man sent to El Salvador
2 independent outlets are covering this story, first reported here by Axios. Verification: Confirmed (how we verify). Every headline links to the original reporting.
A federal judge held the Department of Homeland Security in contempt over the deportation of an illegal alien asylum seeker to El Salvador. The Trump-appointed judge ordered the administration to return the man to the United States. Axios reports it is at least the second time the judge has held the administration in contempt over the deportation.
Patriot Watch first flagged this story 5 d ago, when Axios reported it. Coverage has since grown to 2 independent outlets, including 1 wire/mainstream feed. The most recent report came 5 d ago from The Gateway Pundit.
⚖ The Constitutional Angle
Kaoru Yamataya v. Thomas M. Fisher held that an alien who has landed cannot be removed without notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard, and Immigration and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr held that district courts keep habeas power to decide legal questions in removal cases. The contempt ruling enforces that process; how far a court may go to undo a completed removal is not settled by these cases.
Kaoru Yamataya v. Thomas M. Fisher, Immigrant and Chinese Inspector (The Japanese Immigrant Case) 189 U.S. 86 (1903)
Vote: Majority for the Court (Harlan); Brewer and Peckham dissenting. Exact 7-2 tally not… · Opinion: Harlan
Although Congress may commit exclusion and deportation to executive officers without judicial trial, an alien who has landed and become part of the U.S.
Immigration and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr 533 U.S. 289 (2001)
Vote: 5-4 · Opinion: Justice John Paul Stevens
Two holdings. (1) Jurisdiction: notwithstanding AEDPA and IIRIRA's review-stripping provisions, federal district courts retain jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to decide pure questions of law in habeas petitions filed by aliens facing removal. Because barring all judicial review of such questions would raise a serious Suspension Clause problem — habeas at its historical core ran to executive detention — the Court required a clear, unambiguous statement from Congress before reading a statute to eliminate habeas, and found none.
Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited
