The Justice Department filed a judicial misconduct complaint Wednesday against federal judges in the District of Minnesota over interviews they gave to the New York Times about immigration enforcement in the state, according to Attorney General Todd Blanche.
The complaint, filed with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, targets all but one of the district's judges, according to a Justice Department account relayed by Reuters. Blanche announced the filing Wednesday afternoon, and the department's position was carried in a video statement that described the judges' conduct as violating judicial canons.
"Just a few minutes ago, the Department of Justice filed a judicial misconduct complaint with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals against all but one district court judge in the District of Minnesota for violating various judicial canons," the department said in the statement.
At issue, according to the department, is a New York Times article in which the judges spoke on the record about Operation Metro Surge, an immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis, and about a surge of habeas corpus petitions — lawsuits from detainees demanding to be set free. The department said one Minnesota judge told the paper that officials "weren't arresting, in my view, people who were dangerous criminals on the street," referring to the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
"These judges are commenting publicly on pending and impending cases and making political statements on matters that are currently or just recently been before them, many of which are still on appeal," the department said.
The department said it asked that the judges recuse themselves from every case involving the Department of Homeland Security, "either criminal or civil in nature because of the obvious bias they have shown," according to an account of the announcement carried by One America News.
The department also said it saw an obvious bias against the Department of Homeland Security and immigration authorities in Minnesota. Reuters noted in its report that it is unusual for federal judges to give extensive interviews that reflect on periods when their rulings have made headlines.
The filing drew attention across conservative and mainstream outlets Wednesday evening. CBS News reported that Blanche announced the misconduct complaint against federal judges in Minnesota after they spoke with the New York Times. OAN led its evening broadcast with the filing alongside its coverage of an attempted terror attack aboard an Israel-bound flight, telling viewers the Justice Department had filed the complaint and asking that the judges recuse themselves from DHS cases.
The Minnesota complaint was one of several Justice Department actions moving through the news cycle the same day. Earlier Wednesday afternoon, the department announced that a federal court had dismissed another challenge to energy development in the Gulf of America.
"This Department of Justice will never cease defending this Administration's efforts to ensure our Nation's security," said Acting Associate Attorney General Woodward, according to the department's post. "We are pleased that a third court has correctly applied" the law, the statement continued, praising the ruling.
The department did not name the court or the parties in its public post. The dismissal marked the third court to rule against a challenge to energy development in the Gulf, according to the department's account.
Separately, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan told Newsmax on Wednesday that he hopes former special counsel Jack Smith is indicted after his committee referred Smith to the Justice Department. Jordan's committee has referred Smith for prosecution, and the chairman said in the interview that he wants the department to act on it.
Smith, who brought two federal criminal cases against President Donald Trump before the cases were dropped after Trump's 2024 election victory, has been a target of congressional Republicans since leaving the special counsel's office. The referral itself does not compel the Justice Department to bring charges, and it is not yet known whether the department will act on it.
The day's news also included a major Medicare fraud settlement unrelated to the immigration fight. Independence Blue Cross has agreed to pay twenty-two million five hundred thousand dollars to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by failing to withdraw inaccurate and untruthful diagnosis codes for its Medicare Advantage Plan enrollees and improperly retaining Medicare overpayments, the Justice Department announced.
The Washington Times reported the settlement Wednesday evening. The agreement resolves allegations that the Pennsylvania-based insurer submitted or failed to correct inaccurate diagnoses for Medicare Advantage enrollees, according to the Justice Department and the U.S. attorney's office in Philadelphia. A former Independence Blue Cross employee will receive three million eight hundred thirty thousand dollars as the whistleblower who brought the case, the Philadelphia Business Journal reported. The insurer said the agreement includes no admission of liability.
Next News Network could not independently verify the allegations underlying the Minnesota misconduct complaint or the details of the judges' interviews as described by the Justice Department.
Our Take
The Minnesota filing is the latest sign that the Trump Justice Department is willing to take the fight over immigration enforcement directly to the bench. When federal judges sit for extended interviews with the New York Times about an ongoing enforcement operation — and describe the officers carrying it out as failing to arrest dangerous criminals — they are not merely offering color commentary. They are commenting on matters that are pending or on appeal, and the department is right to say so in a formal complaint.
The remedy the department is seeking is measured: recusal from DHS cases, not removal from the bench. That is a reasonable ask when judges have gone on the record with a national newspaper about the very cases in front of them. The Eighth Circuit should take the complaint seriously.
At the same time, the referral of Jack Smith and the Gulf of America energy ruling show a department that is moving on multiple fronts. Courts have now dismissed a third challenge to Gulf energy development, a reminder that the administration's energy agenda keeps surviving legal attack. And Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are right to keep pressing on Smith, whose prosecutions of the president collapsed before they ever reached a jury.
On the Medicare front, the Independence Blue Cross settlement is a reminder that fraud in Medicare Advantage is not a partisan issue — it is a taxpayer issue. Twenty-two and a half million dollars is real money, and a whistleblower willing to come forward deserves credit for recovering it.
The through-line in all of it: this administration is not backing away from a fight, whether the opponent is a federal judge, an environmental litigant, or an insurance company that billed the government for diagnoses it knew were wrong.
