The Trump administration isn’t just fed up with activist judges—it’s going on offense. In a dramatic escalation of the battle between the executive branch and the courts, President Trump’s Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. District Court of Maryland and all 16 of its judges, accusing them of systematically interfering with the president’s authority to enforce immigration law.

Since Trump’s second term began, judges have issued more than 199 injunctions aimed at freezing his executive orders—a number greater than all such rulings in the entire 20th century. But the final straw appears to be a May 28 standing order from Maryland’s federal district court, which automatically blocks the deportation of illegal immigrants for at least 48 hours if a habeas petition is filed—regardless of the merits of the case.

Chief Judge George Russell III, an Obama appointee, justified the blanket injunctions by citing scheduling difficulties caused by a surge of filings during off-hours. But the Trump administration isn’t buying it. DOJ Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle blasted the order as a clear violation of constitutional norms and Supreme Court precedent, saying, “This obviously illegal practice cannot stand.”

According to the DOJ complaint, the Maryland court’s standing orders not only violate limits Congress placed on district court jurisdiction over immigration matters but also bypass basic procedural safeguards and effectively issue relief as a matter of right. “Defendants’ automatic injunction issues whether or not the alien needs or seeks emergency relief, whether or not the court has jurisdiction over the alien’s claims, and no matter how frivolous the alien’s claims may be,” the lawsuit states.

In practical terms, these orders have paralyzed ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations, preventing agents from carrying out lawful deportations and even obstructing logistical coordination with foreign governments.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, echoing the administration’s frustration, warned that the judiciary’s overreach is threatening constitutional balance. “President Trump’s executive authority has been undermined since the first hours of his presidency by an endless barrage of injunctions designed to halt his agenda,” she said. “This pattern of judicial overreach undermines the democratic process and cannot be allowed to stand.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller previously described the judicial resistance as a “judicial coup,” and the administration’s latest move shows it’s done playing defense. Instead of waiting for the Supreme Court to step in each time a rogue judge blocks immigration enforcement, the Trump DOJ is aiming to preempt such interference at its source.

This lawsuit represents more than a legal skirmish—it’s a full-on constitutional confrontation between the executive and judiciary over who gets to control immigration policy. And it sends a clear message: the days of unchecked judicial activism may be numbered.

Whether the case succeeds or not, the strategy itself signals that Trump is determined to restore executive authority and carry out his immigration crackdown with or without the blessing of the federal bench.