An immigration attorney for the Trump administration has been removed from her post after complaining about her job to a Minnesota judge.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorney Julie Le had told a judge Tuesday that her job "sucks" due to the crushing workload and the government's noncompliance with court orders as part of President Donald Trump's mass deportation campaign, and a source familiar with the matter told CNN that she was sent back to her previous job in the agency.
“They are overwhelmed and they need help, so I, I have to say, stupidly (volunteered),” Le told U.S. District Judge Jerry Blackwell.
The judge had threatened to hold Le and Justice Department attorney Ana Voss in contempt of court for repeated violations of his orders in immigration cases, and she said that would be a relief.
“Sometime I wish you would just hold me in contempt, your honor, so that I can have a full 24 hours of sleep," Le said. "I work days and night just because people (are) still in there, and, yes, procedure in place right now sucks – I’m trying to fix it. I am here with you, your honor. What do you want me to do? The system sucks. This job sucks, and I am trying every breath that I have so that I can get you what you need.”
Le and the other administration lawyers dispatched to Minnesota have faced intense scrutiny from judges over their missteps in the mountain of cases brought before the courts, and last week the chief judge of the state’s federal trial-level court found that ICE “has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.”
Blackwell and other judges in the state have been frustrated by release conditions ICE has imposed on some immigrants, and Le tried to explain the chaotic conditions inside the agency as it tries to meet White House quotas.
“It takes 10 e-mails to get a release condition to be corrected,” Le told the judge. “It take two escalation and a threat that I will walk out for that to be corrected.”
The judge told Le and Voss that he believed they were "working in good faith," but he reminded that court orders are "not conditional."
“Having what you feel are too many detainees, too many cases, too many deadlines, and not enough infrastructure to keep up with it all, is not a defense to continued detention," the judge said. "If anything, it ought to be a warning sign."