'Appearance of bias': Trump admin moves to disqualify judge who criticized ICE for conduct during Minnesota deportation raids

Inset: Minnesota U.S. District Judge John Tunheim (U.S. Courts). Background: President Donald Trump gestures during a reception for Republican members of Congress successful the East Room of the White House, Tuesday, July 22, 2025, successful Washington (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson).

The Trump administration has moved to disqualify a national justice successful a criminal case wherever a noncitizen is accused of trying to ballot by falsely claiming citizenship, according to a Wednesday tribunal filing.

The indictment successful the lawsuit was filed successful precocious September.

But the Department of Justice has issues with the behaviour of U.S. District Judge John Tunheim, a Bill Clinton appointee, astir 1 week earlier the charges were filed successful Minnesota national court.

The question to disqualify takes banal of a New York Times nonfiction "ridiculing the Administration's migration enforcement priorities." The nonfiction successful question was published successful mid-September.

In that article, the justice criticized Immigration and Customs Enforcement implicit the authorities of migration dockets successful the Land of 10,000 Lakes pursuing "Operation Metro Surge."

Beginning successful December 2025, thousands of ICE agents began to expanse the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul for immigrants successful a monolithic bid of often convulsive roundups. Later, the Trump medication boasted this arguable run was "the largest migration enforcement cognition ever carried out."

"Specifically, Judge Tunheim is quoted arsenic stating '[t]hey weren't arresting, successful my view, radical who were unsafe criminals connected the street,'" the question to disqualify reads. "That is not the instrumentality (or adjacent astir the law). But the instrumentality prohibits voting illegally."

Now, the authorities says Tunheim should person thing to bash with the transgression voting fraud lawsuit due to the fact that the instrumentality "compels recusal erstwhile a judge's partiality mightiness reasonably beryllium questioned."

"[I]n the airy of his unethical statements to the New York Times, the American radical volition undoubtedly question whether Judge Tunheim tin beryllium impartial this case," the nine-page motion reads.

The DOJ argues the judge's connection "must beryllium understood successful the discourse of the overarching article: a partisan critique of the Trump Administration's migration enforcement operation."

The motion, arsenic grounds of the alleged partisan context, goes connected to enactment that different justice quoted successful the nonfiction referred to the government's migration policies and practices arsenic reminiscent of overseas "authoritarian" governments similar "Russia" and "China."

"[E]choing Judge Tunheim's explicit statement, the nonfiction paraphrases 'the district's judges' arsenic having 'said astir of the detainees who appeared connected their dockets seemed to beryllium mean radical with homes and jobs,'" the question continues.

More Law&Crime coverage: 'Lacking merit': Judge rejects Trump admin's 'self-serving' bid to recuse from migrant habeas lawsuit conscionable due to the fact that his woman works arsenic lawyer connected Minnesota suit against DHS

The question cites appeals tribunal precedent to found that the modular for disqualification is simply a question of "whether the judge's impartiality mightiness reasonably beryllium questioned by the mean idiosyncratic connected the thoroughfare who knows each the applicable facts of a case." In different words, "the beingness of existent bias is irrelevant," the DOJ argues.

To that end, the authorities says Tunheim's comments were some "factually inaccurate" and "an unvarnished governmental opinion."

"Judge Tunheim jumped straight into the fray by criticizing the Administration's attack to migration enforcement successful cases that came earlier him based connected his subjective argumentation impressions," the question goes on. "Notably, though pandering to the property astir adjacent the legality of the Administration's actions would beryllium improper, Judge Tunheim's connection is legally irrelevant (and frankincense purely political)."

The upshot of those comments makes Tunheim exceedingly unfit to oversee a lawsuit involving an immigrant, the DOJ claims.

"In sum, Judge Tunheim's statements and information successful the New York Times article, astatine a minimum, springiness emergence to the quality of bias successful immigration-related cases," the question continues. "Judge Tunheim should truthful recuse from this case."

Also connected Wednesday, the DOJ filed a disqualification question announcement in a case overseen by U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz — the George W. Bush-appointed jurist who made the aforementioned comments astir the Trump medication acting "authoritarian."

The station 'Appearance of bias': Trump admin moves to disqualify justice who criticized ICE for behaviour during Minnesota deportation raids archetypal appeared connected Law & Crime.