There are few things a lawyer can say in court more offensive than “your verbal orders” do not matter. Yet, that is essentially what a DOJ lawyer, Abhishek Kambli, told Judge Boasberg in court. On Saturday, two or more planes left the U.S. with alleged Venezuelan refugees. The planes left about 5:30 p.m. just as the hearing with Judge Boasberg was starting. (It is exceedingly rare for a Judge to hold a hearing on a Saturday). In his ruling from the bench on Saturday, March 15, the Judge specifically told DOJ that any planes in the air should turn around and come back. But, the planes that were in the air did not turn around and come back. They landed in El Salvador well after the Judge ruled from the bench. See CBS news report here for more information.

Minute Entry

So, the Judge scheduled a hearing for Monday, March 17. At that hearing, Judge Boasberg asked Mr. Kambli what happened. Apparently with a straight face, Deputy AG Kambli said the Judge’s verbal order to turn around any planes did not appear in the Judge’s written order. Incredulous, the Judge asked:

“You’re telling me your first argument is when I said those things, because I didn’t say it in a minute order that the plaintiffs didn’t have to turn around, you didn’t have to comply?” Boasberg said. “You’re saying that you felt you could disregard it because it wasn’t in a written order?”

The Judge was referring to the minute entry entered by the District Clerk. The minute entry is prepared by the Judge’s clerk. It is never anything more than the clerk’s summary of what occurred during a particular hearing. Any first year lawyer would know the minute entry is a summary and not intended to be a verbatim citation of what the judge said. Even so, if a lawyer does not understand a verbal order and how it comports with the minute entry, ignoring them is not the preferred response.

The Judge asked a good question, by about 8:00 a.m., the lawyers for both sides knew a hearing had been scheduled for later that day on March 15. Yet, DOJ scheduled these two flights for later that day at about the time of the hearing. Why?

Tense Hearing

Not surprisingly, the March 17 hearing was tense. The DOJ lawyer was clearly obfuscating. He said he could not discuss operational details about the flights. But, the Judge holds CISA hearings. He has access to a secure facility to hear classified information. Still, Mr. Kambli demurred and declined the offer. The Judge also asked whether information about the flights were classified. It does not strike me that such information ought to be classified. But, even so, the Judge has access to a secure facility.

Judge Boasberg noted, of course, that the appropriate response to a judge over-stepping his authority is an appeal. He concluded the hearing with a request for a sworn statement from a witness by noon, the next day explaining when the flights left and what happened.

Karoline Leavitt, the Press Secretary, posted on X/Twitter that there was some question whether a verbal order carried the same weight as a written order. No,. there is not. And, everyone in that courtroom on March 15 knew that a Judge’s verbal order must be obeyed.

There are few things I can think of that compare to a lawyer in court telling a Judge to his face that his verbal orders did not matter. Mr. Kambli could not have offended the Judge more if he had told Judge Boasberg to go jump in the lake. It is an unbelievable thing to say in court. That Mr. Kambli is also a Deputy Attorney General makes this series of events all the more incredible. It is fair to ask if the current Department of Justice supports the rule of law.