A US federal judge dismissed a lawsuit on Tuesday that saw President Donald Trump suing every federal judge in Maryland over orders blocking the immediate deportation of migrants contesting removal.

Trump filed the suit on Monday in response to an order written by Maryland Chief District Judge George L. Russell III in May. The order prohibited the US government from deporting migrants out of the US who have filed paperwork with Maryland contesting their deportation until 4 PM on the second business day after the habeas corpus petition is filed.

A habeas corpus petition is a legal tool that detained non-citizens in the US use to challenge the lawfulness of their detention before federal authorities. It requires the US government to justify an immigrant’s confinement in front of a federal judge to make sure they are not being held arbitrarily. 

The lawsuit named all 15 Maryland-based federal judges and argued that the judicially-imposed pause on deportations infringes upon executive authority over immigration. The complaint stated:

Every unlawful order entered by the district courts robs the Executive Branch of its most scarce resource: time to put its policies into effect. In the process, such orders diminish the votes of the citizens who elected the head of the Executive Branch. Defendants’ lawless standing orders are nothing more than a particularly egregious example of judicial overreach interfering with Executive Branch prerogatives—and thus undermining the democratic process.

However, the US District Court for the District of Maryland memorandum opinion stated that the Trump administration’s suit should be dismissed because the US does not have the legal right to sue, and judges are absolutely immune from the suit. The opinion ends with District Judge Thomas Cullen’s call for the executive branch to pursue proper ways laid out by Congress to challenge judicial actions:

Much as the Executive fights the characterization, a lawsuit by the executive branch of government against the judicial branch for the exercise of judicial power is not ordinary. The Executive’s lawsuit will be dismissed, and its motion for preliminary injunction denied as moot. Whatever the merits of its grievance with the judges of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, the Executive must find a proper way to raise those concerns.

Maryland federal judges have received particular national attention in light of rulings limiting administration efforts to deport Kilmar Ábrego García. In April, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld a Maryland district court’s order to return Ábrego García to the US after he was deported on reportedly mistaken information. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, but the court declined to rule on any substantive issues in the matter.