{"id":167299,"date":"2026-11-12T16:17:02","date_gmt":"2026-11-13T00:17:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/11\/12\/judge-bars-doj-lawyer-from-case-threatens-default-judgment-over-deliberate-attempt-to-mislead-the-court\/"},"modified":"2026-11-12T16:17:02","modified_gmt":"2026-11-13T00:17:02","slug":"judge-bars-doj-lawyer-from-case-threatens-default-judgment-over-deliberate-attempt-to-mislead-the-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/11\/12\/judge-bars-doj-lawyer-from-case-threatens-default-judgment-over-deliberate-attempt-to-mislead-the-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Judge Bars DOJ Lawyer From Case, Threatens Default Judgment Over \u2018Deliberate Attempt To Mislead The Court\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the year of our lord 2026, a federal judge getting real frustrated at a Trump administration lawyer is practically its own genre. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Sanket Bulsara of the Eastern District of New York added the latest entry<\/a>, barring Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Price from ever appearing again in Benitez v. Department of Homeland Security<\/em>. (That\u2019s the suit alleging that federal immigration officers in New York arrest people based on their ethnicity and without the warrants the law requires.)<\/p>\n

I need a moment for the harshness of the judge\u2019s punishment \u2014 honestly, it\u2019s cold as ice.<\/p>\n

The problem was a November 4 letter with Price\u2019s name on it. The letter told the court that an injunction in a related case covered only the one petitioner in that case. The injunction came from U.S. District Judge Gary Brown, a Trump appointee, in Sanchez Alfaro v. Mullin<\/em>. That case was about ICE\u2019s warrantless arrest of a Long Island man with Special Immigrant Juvenile status<\/a>, and officers later admitted they\u2019d grabbed the wrong guy. Brown had already called the government\u2019s arguments \u201cboth factually incorrect and legally spurious.\u201d And his injunction also wasn\u2019t about one guy, it reads: \u201cBefore effecting a civil immigration arrest in this judicial district, ICE shall obtain a valid warrant of arrest in advance.\u201d (There\u2019s an exception for people likely to flee.)<\/p>\n

\u201cIn this judicial district\u201d\u2026 it\u2019s right there in the text.<\/p>\n

You can\u2019t even write this off as a sloppy read because Price had also filed briefs in Sanchez Alfaro<\/em> arguing that the district-wide warrant requirement would be hard to comply with. He knew exactly how big the order was, hell, he\u2019d complained about how big it was! Then he signed a letter to another judge in the same courthouse saying it was tiny.<\/p>\n

Bulsara wasn\u2019t confused about what happened. From the bench, he said Price\u2019s letter was written in \u201cbad faith, a deliberate attempt to mislead the Court, perpetuate a fraud on the tribunal, and violate[s] obligations under Rule 11.\u201d He said \u201cthe only conclusion that can be drawn from these statements is that they\u2019re made in bad faith.\u201d He also said this wasn\u2019t a one-off but \u201ca pattern of dissembling, obfuscation, and frankly outright misrepresentation that bled from Alfaro<\/em> into this case.\u201d<\/p>\n

He also sounded a little hurt, because he thought he\u2019d been doing the government a favor:<\/p>\n

\n

When I issued the order that I issued in this case, I actually did it fully expecting I was giving a gift horse to the respondents. \u2026 I was flabbergasted by the response.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Turns out you can look a gift horse in the mouth, you just shouldn\u2019t lie to the judge about what you saw.<\/p>\n

The minute order Bulsara entered after the hearing is drier, but it\u2019s no gentler:<\/p>\n

\n

As stated on the record, the Court has found prima facie Rule 11 violations based on the contents of Defendants\u2019 November 4 letter 111. AUSA Price is barred from continuing appearances in this case and must file a notice of withdrawal no later than November 13, 2026.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The order also gives the office\u2019s line attorneys a chaperone:<\/p>\n

\n

Every future filing in this docket must be signed by Richard Hayes, Chief of the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney\u2019s Office for the Eastern District of New York, or someone at his supervisory level or higher.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In other words, nothing gets filed in this case without a grown-up\u2019s signature on it.<\/p>\n

The office as a whole is also on the hook. Under Rule 11(c)(3), it has to show cause \u201cwhy Rule 11 sanctions should not be imposed or imposed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1927 or the Court\u2019s inherent power.\u201d That\u2019s three separate grounds for sanctions in a single sentence. Two other AUSAs whose names appear in the letter\u2019s signature block have until November 16, the same deadline as the show-cause response, to file sworn declarations explaining how much they wrote, edited, or supervised the letter. Bulsara indicated he\u2019ll likely disqualify them too unless they can show they weren\u2019t involved. He told Hayes to think about pulling Price from his other cases before the court as well, adding: \u201cYour office is on notice.\u201d Hayes didn\u2019t address the misconduct allegations at the hearing and asked for time to review the transcript.<\/p>\n

Then there\u2019s the threat that really matters:<\/p>\n

\n

The Court has issued a warning about the consequence should the Court discover any future misrepresentation or false statement (either by counsel or any witness or declarant): after an opportunity to be heard, should preliminary findings be confirmed, the Court will enter a default judgment in this case in favor of Plaintiffs, with the only issue for resolution to be remedies to be imposed.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It\u2019s also part of a pattern. In Florida, Judge Roy Dalton put DOJ lawyers on blast<\/a> for pretending inconvenient law doesn\u2019t exist. In New Jersey, Judge Zahid Quraishi tossed a supervisory AUSA out of his courtroom<\/a> while trying to figure out who\u2019s even running the office. In Rhode Island, Judge Mary McElroy nuked the department for an \u201cappalling lack of candor\u201d<\/a> over its subpoena campaign. In Minnesota, Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz ran out of patience with ICE treating court orders as optional<\/a>. And the Comey prosecution got the benchslap treatment<\/a> before it ever got near a jury. The judges are Bush appointees, Trump appointees, Obama appointees, and Biden appointees. They keep reaching the same conclusion.<\/p>\n

For decades the Justice Department walked into court with the presumption of regularity: judges took its word because its word was usually good. Price\u2019s office is now on notice that it\u2019s lost that presumption, and at this point it\u2019s hard to argue any other office is in a different position.<\/p>\n

Earlier:<\/strong> A Judge Just Turned The Government\u2019s Own \u2018Reconsider\u2019 Motion Against Them And It\u2019s Glorious<\/a>
DOJ Gets Nuked By RI Judge For \u2018Appalling Lack Of Candor\u2019<\/a>
Judge Tosses DOJ Lawyer From Courtroom As New Jersey U.S. Attorney\u2019s Office Descends Into Chaos<\/a>
\u2018Don\u2019t Hide The Ball\u2019: Judge Puts DOJ\u2019s Lawyers On Blast<\/a>
Bush-Appointed Federal Judge To ICE: Comply With Court Courts. ICE: You\u2019ve Got Us There!<\/a>
ICE Dodges Courtroom Showdown, But Federal Judge Isn\u2019t Backing Down<\/a>
Comey Prosecution Gets The Benchslap Treatment, Because Of Course<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of\u00a0The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of\u00a0Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email\u00a0her<\/a>\u00a0with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter\u00a0@Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky\u00a0@Kathryn1<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Judge Bars DOJ Lawyer From Case, Threatens Default Judgment Over \u2018Deliberate Attempt To Mislead The Court\u2019<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In the year of our lord 2026, a federal judge getting real frustrated at a Trump administration lawyer is practically its own genre. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Sanket Bulsara of the Eastern District of New York added the latest entry<\/a>, barring Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Price from ever appearing again in Benitez v. Department of Homeland Security<\/em>. (That\u2019s the suit alleging that federal immigration officers in New York arrest people based on their ethnicity and without the warrants the law requires.)<\/p>\n

I need a moment for the harshness of the judge\u2019s punishment \u2014 honestly, it\u2019s cold as ice.<\/p>\n

The problem was a November 4 letter with Price\u2019s name on it. The letter told the court that an injunction in a related case covered only the one petitioner in that case. The injunction came from U.S. District Judge Gary Brown, a Trump appointee, in Sanchez Alfaro v. Mullin<\/em>. That case was about ICE\u2019s warrantless arrest of a Long Island man with Special Immigrant Juvenile status<\/a>, and officers later admitted they\u2019d grabbed the wrong guy. Brown had already called the government\u2019s arguments \u201cboth factually incorrect and legally spurious.\u201d And his injunction also wasn\u2019t about one guy, it reads: \u201cBefore effecting a civil immigration arrest in this judicial district, ICE shall obtain a valid warrant of arrest in advance.\u201d (There\u2019s an exception for people likely to flee.)<\/p>\n

\u201cIn this judicial district\u201d\u2026 it\u2019s right there in the text.<\/p>\n

You can\u2019t even write this off as a sloppy read because Price had also filed briefs in Sanchez Alfaro<\/em> arguing that the district-wide warrant requirement would be hard to comply with. He knew exactly how big the order was, hell, he\u2019d complained about how big it was! Then he signed a letter to another judge in the same courthouse saying it was tiny.<\/p>\n

Bulsara wasn\u2019t confused about what happened. From the bench, he said Price\u2019s letter was written in \u201cbad faith, a deliberate attempt to mislead the Court, perpetuate a fraud on the tribunal, and violate[s] obligations under Rule 11.\u201d He said \u201cthe only conclusion that can be drawn from these statements is that they\u2019re made in bad faith.\u201d He also said this wasn\u2019t a one-off but \u201ca pattern of dissembling, obfuscation, and frankly outright misrepresentation that bled from Alfaro<\/em> into this case.\u201d<\/p>\n

He also sounded a little hurt, because he thought he\u2019d been doing the government a favor:<\/p>\n

\n

When I issued the order that I issued in this case, I actually did it fully expecting I was giving a gift horse to the respondents. \u2026 I was flabbergasted by the response.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Turns out you can look a gift horse in the mouth, you just shouldn\u2019t lie to the judge about what you saw.<\/p>\n

The minute order Bulsara entered after the hearing is drier, but it\u2019s no gentler:<\/p>\n

\n

As stated on the record, the Court has found prima facie Rule 11 violations based on the contents of Defendants\u2019 November 4 letter 111. AUSA Price is barred from continuing appearances in this case and must file a notice of withdrawal no later than November 13, 2026.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The order also gives the office\u2019s line attorneys a chaperone:<\/p>\n

\n

Every future filing in this docket must be signed by Richard Hayes, Chief of the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney\u2019s Office for the Eastern District of New York, or someone at his supervisory level or higher.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In other words, nothing gets filed in this case without a grown-up\u2019s signature on it.<\/p>\n

The office as a whole is also on the hook. Under Rule 11(c)(3), it has to show cause \u201cwhy Rule 11 sanctions should not be imposed or imposed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1927 or the Court\u2019s inherent power.\u201d That\u2019s three separate grounds for sanctions in a single sentence. Two other AUSAs whose names appear in the letter\u2019s signature block have until November 16, the same deadline as the show-cause response, to file sworn declarations explaining how much they wrote, edited, or supervised the letter. Bulsara indicated he\u2019ll likely disqualify them too unless they can show they weren\u2019t involved. He told Hayes to think about pulling Price from his other cases before the court as well, adding: \u201cYour office is on notice.\u201d Hayes didn\u2019t address the misconduct allegations at the hearing and asked for time to review the transcript.<\/p>\n

Then there\u2019s the threat that really matters:<\/p>\n

\n

The Court has issued a warning about the consequence should the Court discover any future misrepresentation or false statement (either by counsel or any witness or declarant): after an opportunity to be heard, should preliminary findings be confirmed, the Court will enter a default judgment in this case in favor of Plaintiffs, with the only issue for resolution to be remedies to be imposed.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It\u2019s also part of a pattern. In Florida, Judge Roy Dalton put DOJ lawyers on blast<\/a> for pretending inconvenient law doesn\u2019t exist. In New Jersey, Judge Zahid Quraishi tossed a supervisory AUSA out of his courtroom<\/a> while trying to figure out who\u2019s even running the office. In Rhode Island, Judge Mary McElroy nuked the department for an \u201cappalling lack of candor\u201d<\/a> over its subpoena campaign. In Minnesota, Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz ran out of patience with ICE treating court orders as optional<\/a>. And the Comey prosecution got the benchslap treatment<\/a> before it ever got near a jury. The judges are Bush appointees, Trump appointees, Obama appointees, and Biden appointees. They keep reaching the same conclusion.<\/p>\n

For decades the Justice Department walked into court with the presumption of regularity: judges took its word because its word was usually good. Price\u2019s office is now on notice that it\u2019s lost that presumption, and at this point it\u2019s hard to argue any other office is in a different position.<\/p>\n

Earlier:<\/strong> A Judge Just Turned The Government\u2019s Own \u2018Reconsider\u2019 Motion Against Them And It\u2019s Glorious<\/a>
DOJ Gets Nuked By RI Judge For \u2018Appalling Lack Of Candor\u2019<\/a>
Judge Tosses DOJ Lawyer From Courtroom As New Jersey U.S. Attorney\u2019s Office Descends Into Chaos<\/a>
\u2018Don\u2019t Hide The Ball\u2019: Judge Puts DOJ\u2019s Lawyers On Blast<\/a>
Bush-Appointed Federal Judge To ICE: Comply With Court Courts. ICE: You\u2019ve Got Us There!<\/a>
ICE Dodges Courtroom Showdown, But Federal Judge Isn\u2019t Backing Down<\/a>
Comey Prosecution Gets The Benchslap Treatment, Because Of Course<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of\u00a0The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of\u00a0Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email\u00a0her<\/a>\u00a0with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter\u00a0@Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky\u00a0@Kathryn1<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Judge Bars DOJ Lawyer From Case, Threatens Default Judgment Over \u2018Deliberate Attempt To Mislead The Court\u2019<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the year of our lord 2026, a federal judge getting real frustrated at a Trump administration lawyer is practically its own genre. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Sanket Bulsara of the Eastern District of New York added the latest entry, barring Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Price from ever appearing again in Benitez v. Department […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":167300,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-167299","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167299","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=167299"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167299\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/167300"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167299"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167299"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167299"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}