How about court orders?

https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/ice-violations-judge-...

> ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence," Schiltz said, adding that he counted 96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/frustrations-from-judge-prosecu...

[deleted]

[flagged]

"Allegations" from the exact judges whose orders aren't being enacted? The orders in question are pretty simple: release this guy. Don't take this guy out of state. It's pretty clear when they're not being followed. This guy is not a slouch:

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/27/patrick-schiltz-jud...

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.230...

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.230...

Did you notice that one article I linked involved a DoJ lawyer admitting that she couldn't convince ICE to obey court orders that she was trying to transmit to them? That's beyond an allegation and into admission. How is that not evidence?

More on these ignored court orders:

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/01/28/ice-illegally-detai...

At this point you're taking a piss, this is not a honest discussion stance.

Judges themselves complained about their own orders being ivolated/ignored. Repeatedly.

> you're taking a piss

"You are taking a piss" -- you are currently urinating.

"You are taking the piss" -- you are mocking me or this.

Thank you. Sadly can't edit it anymore but I'll remember it next time.

If someone violates a court order don’t they get arrested?? Can’t the judge pronounce the perpetrators should be arrested instead of just complaining?

This is exactly the breakdown of the system that people are sounding the alarm about.

The problem is that it's always specific to a particular case. So, if one guy isn't being released according to court order, they could order someone held in the courthouse jail until he is, and probably just the threat will get him released. But then 1) nobody ends up in jail, because they're not in contempt anymore and 2) it doesn't do anything for any other cases, and there are so many other cases. This sort of contempt where a judge can just order it is "civil contempt" and is meant to convince someone to comply with the court order, it can't be used to punish someone longer than that (criminal contempt can, but you need an actual prosecution, trial, etc).

You might think "ok can't they be held in contempt for the pattern of ignoring court orders" and, well, you'd think so. But that looks a lot like a universal injunction or a class action and SCOTUS has deliberately been nerfing those.

If they've simply been committing crimes then judges don't have anything to do- they'd have to be prosecuted by someone, or I guess sued civilly, but that won't put them in jail either and takes forever.

There's no one in 2026 honestly saying "But what crimes has he committed???" its just concern trolls, sealions, bots, and some nazis.