During a congressional hearing on Tuesday, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem found herself facing tough questions about ongoing violations of court orders by immigration officials. These inquiries arose during her appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, marking her first testimony since the controversial “Operation Metro Surge” led to several homicides by federal authorities in Minnesota.

Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, the committee’s ranking member, challenged Secretary Noem on how federal judges in Minnesota have reacted to the conduct of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Since the previous fall, these agents have intensified deportation efforts under the Trump administration.

“Just last week, the chief federal judge in Minnesota, appointed by Republicans, identified more than 200 instances where ICE officials violated court orders in just two months,” Durbin stated. He quoted the judge, remarking, “The court is not aware of another occasion in the history of the United States in which a federal court has had to threaten contempt repeatedly to ensure the U.S. government complies with court orders.”

Senator Durbin was referencing Chief U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Schiltz, appointed by George W. Bush, who recently threatened criminal contempt proceedings against ICE for continuously ignoring court orders related to numerous habeas corpus cases. These cases involve immigrants claiming they have been unlawfully detained, as reported by Law & Crime.

Moreover, Durbin highlighted that the issue is not confined to Minnesota; similar defiance by ICE agents, who continue to detain individuals despite court orders, is occurring across other regions as well.

But, the senator noted, Minnesota is not the only place where ICE agents are locking people up with impunity while flouting court orders.

“In a sworn declaration, the Trump Justice Department itself acknowledged that your agency has violated court orders more than 50 times in recent weeks in one state, New Jersey,” Durbin continued.

This time, the senator was referring to proceedings overseen by U.S. District Judge Zahid Quraishi, a Joe Biden appointee.

In that case, the court’s estimate pegs the Trump administration’s lawbreaking slightly higher: By Quraishi’s count, the U.S. attorney’s office in New Jersey has violated 72 court orders and “expressly admitted” violating 56 such orders, Law&Crime previously reported.

Those admissions came days after yet another federal judge in New Jersey criticized ICE for violating a no-transfer order and for “repeatedly” violating similar “judicial orders more than fifty (50) times in just the past sixty (60) days,” Law&Crime previously reported.

Durbin asked the witness plainly: “Secretary Noem, is DHS required to follow federal court orders?”

To which the secretary replied: “Yes, sir, and we do comply with federal court orders.”

The senator pressed the witness to reconcile her answer with the in-court admissions made by Department of Justice lawyers.

“How do you explain that your agency has repeatedly violated court orders as your own administration has admitted?” Durbin asked.

In response, Noem stumbled over her words — offering an answer that does not appear to comport with the country’s separation of powers framework.

“Sir, we follow court orders and when they apply and when the jurisdiction and decision is applicable to a federal agency like ours,” she said.

In the U.S., district court judges have broad jurisdictional reach over federal agencies unless a statute offers a direct exception to a court of appeals. No such exception exists for DHS or its constituent or subordinate agencies. Specific to the current controversy, district court judges have express authority to rule on petitions for writs of habeas corpus, according to a federal law on the books since 1948.

The ancient writ of habeas corpus, a legal concept dating back some 900-plus years, allows for legal arguments that someone is being illegally confined, detained or imprisoned. The writ is generally considered the bedrock of the American and British legal systems.

Noem’s answer seemingly disregarded both law and history.

Durbin then squinted his eyes at the witness and gave the appearance of either not understanding or being taken aback.

“I’m sorry, would you clarify what you ended that with?” the senator asked.

Noem then shifted her response. This time, the secretary left out her earlier efforts to caveat and equivocate about whether courts have jurisdiction over her agents and the applicability of court orders.

“We follow court orders when they are given to us,” Noem said. “Federal court orders we follow. Absolutely.”

Durbin remained askance.

“So these judges are wrong?” the senator asked.

Finally, Noem settled on trying to avoid the question.

“No, I’m not saying that they’re wrong and I can’t speak specifically to that statement that was given,” she said.