DOJ Attorney Faces Daily Fine After Judge Finds Him in Contempt Over Immigration Case

A federal judge in Minnesota has held a Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney in civil contempt for what she called “flagrant disobedience of court orders” in an immigration case, marking a potential turning point in tensions between the judiciary and the Trump administration. The case centers on the handling of Rigoberto Soto Jimenez, a noncitizen caught in a recent immigration crackdown.

Contempt Finding and Daily Sanctions

U.S. District Judge Laura Provinzino ordered Matthew Isihara, a military attorney detailed to the DOJ as a special U.S. Attorney, to pay a $500 daily fine starting Friday, February 20, 2026, until Soto Jimenez’s identification documents are returned to him. The documents were not initially returned when Soto Jimenez was released from an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility, as Provinzino had ordered on February 9th.

Judge Rejects Explanation of High Caseload

Isihara argued the violation wasn’t intentional, attributing it to an “enormous volume of cases” stemming from Operation Metro Surge. Still, Judge Provinzino dismissed this explanation, stating, “The government’s understaffing and high caseload is a problem of its own making and absolutely does not justify flagrant disobedience of court orders.” She emphasized the need for immediate compliance, stating, “Petitioner needs to get his documents immediately, and there will be a $500 sanction any day beyond tomorrow that they are not received by his attorney.”

Details of the Case and Government Non-Compliance

Provinzino had previously ordered Soto Jimenez’s release from ICE custody on February 9th, finding his detention unlawful due to the lack of an administrative warrant. The order stipulated his release in Minnesota and the return of all his property. However, the government released Soto Jimenez in Texas and failed to return his identification documents. According to a transcript obtained by CNN, Isihara and his colleagues hadn’t begun working on the case until the morning of the hearing.

Broader Pattern of Non-Compliance

This case is part of a growing trend of non-compliance with court orders in immigration cases. Judges in Minnesota and other jurisdictions have expressed increasing frustration with the administration’s repeated violations, particularly in fast-moving immigration cases. Similar issues arose recently with Julie Le, a Trump administration lawyer who faced scrutiny for repeated violations in immigration cases. She attributed the issues to personnel shortages and inadequate procedures, stating, “The system sucks. This job sucks.”

Other Cases Highlight Similar Issues

Similar concerns are surfacing in other states. In Baltimore, a Trump-appointed judge is scrutinizing claims that federal immigration agencies violated a 2024 settlement agreement protecting young migrants with pending asylum claims. In New Jersey, a DOJ official reported over 50 instances of violations of court orders in hundreds of immigration cases since early December, often involving improper transfers of detainees or missed deadlines.

Legal Experts Weigh In

Steve Vladeck, a CNN legal analyst and professor at Georgetown University Law Center, noted that this is the first instance of a court directly using its coercive power to compel immediate compliance with a court order. He added, “The notion that lawyers must themselves pay a price for their client’s non-compliance with court orders is hardly new, but it may be long overdue in the context of the current administration.”