2026年7月29日 / 美国东部时间下午6:17 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
作者：阿什利·伯克特
美国司法部正提议一项新规则，赋予联邦移民法官权力，可对违反法庭命令的律师、客户以及证人处以藐视法庭罪。此举背离了历史惯例，法律专家警告此举可能违宪。
这项由负责移民法院系统的司法部下属机构移民审查执行办公室提出的监管提案，将首次允许移民法官对继续违抗法庭命令的律师或其他个人处以1000美元至3500美元不等的罚款。
司法部在提案中写道：“移民法官必须拥有所有可用工具——包括实施民事罚款的权力——以掌控面前的庭审程序，这一点至关重要。”
值得注意的是，该提案将国土安全部律师等联邦政府雇员排除在移民法官的藐视法庭命令管辖范围之外。批评人士称，这造成了一种失衡且不公的局面，可能导致政府的不当行为不受约束。
相比之下，在联邦地区法院，第三条法官有权在有正当理由的情况下，对出庭的所有律师提起刑事或民事藐视法庭诉讼。司法部在提案中辩称，赋予移民法官制裁政府律师的权力并无必要，因为国土安全部律师可接受监察长办公室或职业责任办公室的纪律处分。
美国移民律师协会政府关系高级主任格雷戈里·陈表示：“这项完全失衡的监管提案仅赋予法官制裁移民律师的权力，却不能制裁移民海关执法局的律师，这表明本届政府的目标与公正且平衡的法治毫无关系。相反，这项规定是又一次针对移民律师的举措，契合总统的恐吓策略。”
这项新提案是特朗普政府一系列加大打击移民力度、落实特朗普总统大规模驱逐政策的最新行动。
根据前联邦调查局分析师分析并发布的政府数据，自去年以来，移民审查执行办公室已有数百名资深联邦移民法官离职，其中许多人是在毫无预警或正当理由的情况下被解雇的。2025年，移民审查执行办公室流失了370名律师。
移民法院系统在流失大量法官的同时，目前还面临着超过350万起案件的积压，这一数据来自该提案。
许多前移民法官公开表示，他们曾面临加快驱逐程序或无需保释就拘留人员的压力。司法部在招聘替代法官的广告中，将该职位称为“驱逐法官”。
前资深移民法官卡伦·多诺霍·史蒂文斯表示，这项允许移民法官对非公民或其律师处以藐视法庭罪的新提案“与恐惧文化挂钩”。“先恐吓法官，然后法官就会恐吓律师。”
这份刊登在《联邦公报》上的提案指出，移民法官可因多种违规行为对律师或客户实施制裁，包括屡次未能按时出庭、不遵守命令，乃至行为失当或作出虚假陈述。
多位接受哥伦比亚广播公司新闻采访的法律专家表示，该提案可能违法，因为移民法院属于行政分支，受宪法第二条约束，而行政分支并无藐视法庭的权力。这项权力仅属于司法和立法分支。
陈表示，该提案“存在宪法缺陷”。
公众将有60天时间对该提案进行评议并提交意见。
DOJ seeks to empower immigration judges to hold lawyers and their clients in contempt
July 29, 2026 / 6:17 PM EDT / CBS News
By Ashley Burkett
The Justice Department is proposing a new rule to empower federal immigration judges to hold attorneys, their clients and witnesses in contempt if they violate court orders, in a move that departs from historical practice and which legal experts warn could be unconstitutional.
The regulatory proposal by the Executive Office for Immigration Review, an office of the DOJ that runs the immigration court system, would allow immigration judges for the very first time to impose fines ranging from $1,000 up to as much as $3,500 if an attorney or other individual continues to defy court orders.
“It is crucial for immigration judges to have every tool available—including the authority to impose civil money penalties—to control the proceedings before them,” the Justice Department wrote in its proposal.
The proposal notably exempts federal government employees, such as Department of Homeland Security attorneys, from being subject to any contempt order by an immigration judge — in what critics say represents a lopsided and unfair scenario that would allow potential government misconduct to go unchecked.
In federal district courts, by contrast, Article III judges have the power to hold all attorneys who appear before the court in criminal or civil contempt, if warranted. In its proposal, the Justice Department argues that giving immigration judges the power to sanction government lawyers is not necessary because DHS attorneys can be disciplined by the Office of the Inspector General or the Office of Professional Responsibility.
“By proposing a completely skewed regulation that empowers judges to hold in contempt only the attorneys for immigrants but not ICE attorneys, the Administration has revealed that its goal has nothing to do with the just and balanced rule of law. Instead, this rule is another effort to target immigration attorneys that falls in line with the President’s intimidation tactics,” said Gregory Chen, senior director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
The new proposal marks the latest in a series of efforts by the Trump administration to more readily crack down on immigration and carry out President Trump’s mass deportation policies.
At the Executive Office for Immigration Review, hundreds of longtime federal immigration judges have left since last year, many of whom were fired abruptly without warning or cause. In 2025, EOIR lost 370 attorneys, according to government data analyzed and published by a former FBI analyst.
At the same time it has lost so many judges, the immigration court system is facing a current backlog of more than 3.5 million cases, according to the proposed rule.
Many former immigration judges have spoken publicly about pressures they faced to expedite deportations or detain people without bond. In ads seeking to hire replacement judges, the DOJ has referred to the role as being that of a “deportation judge.”
The new proposal that would allow immigration judges to hold noncitizens or their lawyers in contempt “ties into the culture of fear,” said Karen Donoso Stevens, a former longtime immigration judge. “First, scare the judges. Then the judges will scare the attorneys.”
The proposed rule, published in the Federal Register, states immigration judges would be allowed to sanction lawyers or their clients for a variety of offenses, from repeatedly failing to appear on time or failing to follow orders, up to disorderly conduct or making false statements.
Several legal experts who spoke with CBS News said the proposal is potentially unlawful because immigration courts are part of the executive branch and fall under Article II of the Constitution, which states that the executive branch has no contempt authority. That power belongs exclusively to the judicial and legislative branches.
The proposal is “constitutionally flawed,” Chen said.
The public will have 60 days to review the proposal and submit comments.
发表回复