DOJ seeks judge's recusal in immigration cases
Archived — this story has rotated out of today’s deck. It is kept here in full.
The gist
Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward moved to recuse Judges Patrick Schiltz and John Tunheim in two immigration cases.
The push tests whether judges' public comments can disqualify them from cases.
Background
Patrick Schiltz and John Tunheim are U.S. District Judges in Minnesota; Schiltz, a George W. Bush appointee, served as chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota during Operation Metro Surge, the Trump administration's wintertime immigration crackdown in the state, and Tunheim is a Clinton appointee. In mid-September a New York Times article quoted both judges on the record about the sweeps. The Justice Department, led on this by Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, the department's third-highest-ranking official, argues those remarks show apparent bias in immigration matters.
How it unfolded
- Sep 17, 2026The New York Times publishes an article based on on-the-record interviews with Judges Patrick Schiltz and John Tunheim about Operation Metro Surge.
- Sep 30, 2026The Justice Department files a judicial misconduct complaint demanding that seven judges who spoke to the Times recuse themselves from DHS matters.
- Oct 18, 2026Over the weekend, Woodward moves to disqualify U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes from a case involving President Trump's effort to overhaul a historic public golf course in Washington, D.C.; Reyes rejects the effort on Sunday.
- Oct 20, 2026Woodward files motions seeking the recusal of Judges Schiltz and Tunheim in two separate immigration cases.
- Nov 23, 2026A hearing is scheduled on the motion against Judge Schiltz.
Who’s saying what
- Official
- Woodward says the judges engaged in improper political commentary and that federal law compels recusal when a judge's partiality might reasonably be questioned.
- Support
- Attorney General Todd Blanche says the judges' conduct undermined public confidence in an impartial judiciary in Minnesota.
- Caution
- A court spokesperson says the judges' remarks were within ethical guidelines, citing a federal judiciary advisory opinion that judges may speak on core judiciary matters such as the rule of law and judicial independence.
- Expert
- Law professors Charles Geyh and Greg Sisk describe the recusal push as an effort to antagonize judges and send a message to other federal judges.
Still unverified
Judicial ethics experts expect the administration will likely fail in its effort to sideline Schiltz and Tunheim, according to CBS News; under federal law judges decide recusal themselves, and the government can appeal if they decline.