A federal judge on Tuesday threw out the Justice Department’s lawsuit against all 15 federal district judges in Maryland over an order slowing down its speedy deportation efforts, calling the administration’s attacks on the judiciary “unprecedented and unfortunate.”

U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen, an appointee of President Trump who sits on a federal court in Virginia, dismissed the lawsuit challenging a May standing order

that automatically blocks the deportation of migrants in Maryland who file legal challenges over their detention for two business days.

The Trump administration had argued that the order, which was signed by the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland’s chief judge, interferes with the executive branch’s powers and violate various rules.

“Fair enough, as far as it goes,” Cullen wrote. “If these arguments were made in the proper forum, they might well get some traction.”

But the judge explained that, instead of challenging the standing order through the proper channels, it chose a “different, and more confrontational, path entirely” by suing the entire Maryland bench.

In a footnote, he took it a step further.

“Indeed, over the past several months, principal officers of the Executive (and their spokespersons) have described federal district judges across the country as ‘left-wing,’ ‘liberal,’ ‘activists,’ ‘radical,’ ‘politically minded,’ ‘rogue,’ ‘unhinged,’ ‘outrageous, overzealous, [and] unconstitutional,’ ‘[c]rooked,’ and worse,” Cullen wrote.

“Although some tension between the coordinate branches of government is a hallmark of our constitutional system, this concerted effort by the Executive to smear and impugn individual judges who rule against it is both unprecedented and unfortunate.”

In tossing the lawsuit, Cullen said he agreed “nearly across the board” with the judges who argued that the action must be dismissed because it amounted to a political dispute between two co-equal branches of government. The judges also argued that because standing orders are quintessential judicial actions, they must be immune from the suit.

Cullen said that to rule any other way but dismissing the suit would “run counter to
overwhelming precedent, depart from longstanding constitutional tradition, and offend the
rule of law.”

Still, he said, the Trump administration is not without recourse.

“Far from it,” Cullen wrote. “If the Executive truly believes that Defendants’ standing orders violate the law, it should avail itself of the tried-and-true recourse available to all federal litigants: It should appeal.”

The standing order, signed by U.S. District Judge George Russell, cited an “influx” of habeas petitions from detained migrants as the Trump administration ramped up deportations, noting that the challenges to the legality of a person’s detention have often been filed outside normal court hours, resulting in scheduling challenges and “hurried and frustrating hearings.”

The Hill requested comment from the Justice Department.