Judge slams Trump officials over 'deliberate choice to defy' court

In California, federal Sunshine Suzanne Sykes, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, is having a legal fight with the Trump administration over its immigration policies — especially when it comes to mandatory detention. And now, Sykes is criticizing Trump Administration, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials for defying her orders.

Trump officials, according to Sykes, are making a deliberate choice to defy court orders.

Referencing the case Olga Sosa Inzuna v. Warden of Adelanto Detention Facility et al, Politico's Kyle Cheney — in a January 28 post on X — observed, "Judge Sykes in California has grown increasingly frustrated that her attempt to grant nationwide class action relief from the Trump administration's mandatory detention policy has not stopped the flood of habeas petitions."

Sykes has issued a series of orders pertaining to the Trump administration's immigration and mandatory detention policies.

Legal blogger Paul Saluja, in a post for the firm Saluja Law, noted that Sykes "issued a sweeping rebuke of the Department of Homeland Security's July 2025 detention directive — an unprecedented policy that attempted to deny bond hearings to nearly all immigrants who entered the United States without inspection…. The litigation began after large-scale raids across Southern California resulted in the arrest of approximately 2000 individuals per day — many of whom were sent to Adelanto Detention Center. Four of those individuals became the named petitioners: Lazaro Maldonado Bautista, Ananias Pasqual, Ana Franco Galdamez and Luiz Alberto de Aquino de Aquino."

Saluja explained, "In a series of three orders issued between July and November 2025, U.S. District Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes ruled that the policy was unlawful, unconstitutional, and contrary to the plain language of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The rulings have far-reaching consequences: thousands of immigrants previously subjected to mandatory detention are now eligible for release on bond, and DHS may no longer treat long-settled residents as 'applicants for admission' for purposes of detention."

Sykes' concerns are voiced in a court documented issued on January 27.

The document states, "The Court ORDERS the following: Respondents are enjoined from continuing to detain Petitioner unless she is provided with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within 7 days2 of the date of this Order; Respondents are enjoined from transferring, relocating, or removing Petitioner from the Central District of California without further order of the Court and pending final resolution of this litigation."

X user Mike Young stressed that Sykes' tone is dead-serious.

"Judge Sykes is not hinting," according to Young. "She’s accusing DHS of an intentional end-run. In an order granting a TRO in Olga Sosa Inzuna's case, she says these filings have become 'routine' because Respondents chose to keep defying the final judgment in Bautista. She lays out the loop: detainees file habeas as Bautista class members, DHS opposes anyway, the court orders bond hearings, then DHS does it again. So she stops treating this like good-faith lawyering."