Minnesota Federal Judges Misconduct Complaint, DOJ Accuses Seven Judges Over New York Times Interviews

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a judicial misconduct complaint on September 30, 2026 with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit against seven federal judges of the District of Minnesota. The complaint says the judges made improper comments to The New York Times about federal immigration enforcement in Minnesota. It specifically names Judge Patrick J. Schiltz and Judge John R. Tunheim and refers to the other judges anonymously.

The complaint is an allegation, not a finding. No court has found that any judge committed misconduct. The judges dispute the DOJ’s account. The DOJ asks the Eighth Circuit to investigate and to require recusal from cases involving the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Minnesota Federal Judges Misconduct Complaint: Quick Facts

Issue	Details
Complaint filed	September 30, 2026
Filed by	U.S. Department of Justice
Filed with	U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (addressed to Chief Judge Steven M. Colloton)
Judges named	Patrick J. Schiltz and John R. Tunheim; others referred to anonymously
Number of judges	Seven, per the DOJ
Trigger	Interviews for a New York Times article, “Trump’s Minnesota Surge Threatened Democracy, Judge Warns” (Sept. 17, 2026)
Main allegation	Improper public comments on pending or impending matters and immigration policy
DOJ asks for	An investigation and recusal from DHS-related matters
Judges’ position	Their comments were within the judicial ethics rules
Governing law	Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 351–364
Status	Complaint filed; process pending

Why Did the DOJ File a Misconduct Complaint Against Minnesota Federal Judges?

The complaint stems from the September 17 New York Times article about how a federal immigration enforcement surge, Operation Metro Surge, affected the Minnesota federal courts. According to the DOJ, Judge Schiltz took part in a 90-minute interview and six other judges also spoke with the newspaper.

The DOJ argues that the judges went beyond discussing the judiciary and commented on matters pending or impending before courts, and that some comments were political or policy statements. It says this created a reasonable question about their impartiality in DHS cases. Attorney General Todd Blanche said the conduct undermined confidence in an impartial judiciary.

The complaint does not challenge a ruling in a specific case. It concerns the judges’ public statements.

Who Are Judge Patrick Schiltz and Judge John Tunheim?

Judge Patrick J. Schiltz was appointed by President George W. Bush and clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia. He served as chief judge of the District of Minnesota during the surge. In a January 2026 order, he wrote that ICE is “not a law unto itself.” CBS News reported that he identified 96 court orders in 74 cases that he said ICE had violated.

Judge John R. Tunheim was appointed by President Bill Clinton. According to the DOJ complaint and news reports, he disputed the government’s description of people arrested during the operation as dangerous criminals.

The DOJ points to this litigation background when it argues the judges’ comments concerned matters still before the courts.

Related article: State Department Revokes More Than 250,000 U.S. Visas, What the Immigration Vetting Crackdown Means for Visa Holders

What Does the Code of Conduct for United States Judges Say?

• Canon 1: judges should uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.
• Canon 2: judges should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
• Canon 3(A)(6): a judge should not make public comments on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court, with exceptions for official duties, explaining court procedures and certain legal-education settings.
• Canon 4: judges may speak, write and teach about the law, the legal system and the administration of justice.

The dispute turns on one question: were the judges discussing the merits of pending cases, or broader issues of judicial independence and the administration of justice? The DOJ says the first. The judges say the second.

What Is the February 2026 Judicial Ethics Advisory Opinion?

The federal judiciary’s Committee on Codes of Conduct issued guidance in February 2026 saying judges may take part in civic activity involving core judiciary matters, including the rule of law and judicial independence, while using caution about tone and context. Schiltz says his comments fit that guidance. The DOJ says the judges’ comments went further and involved pending immigration matters.

What Do the Minnesota Judges Say About the DOJ Complaint?

A District of Minnesota spokesperson said legal-ethics experts have concluded the judges acted within the ethics rules when discussing the judiciary, the rule of law and judicial independence. Schiltz said, “That is exactly what I did,” in reference to the February guidance, according to the Associated Press.

Does the Complaint Mean the Judges Committed Misconduct?

No. It starts a review process. The Eighth Circuit handles complaints against judges in its circuit, which includes Minnesota, under 28 U.S.C. §§ 351–364 and the Judicial Conference’s Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings.

What Happens Next in the Eighth Circuit Judicial Misconduct Process?

1. Chief judge review. Chief Judge Colloton reviews the complaint and may conduct a limited inquiry.
2. Outcome at that stage. The chief judge may dismiss the complaint, conclude it because corrective action has been taken or events have made action unnecessary, or refer it to a special committee.
3. Special committee. If appointed, it investigates and reports to the circuit’s judicial council.
4. Judicial council. It can take the actions the statute and rules allow.
5. Separate recusal motions. In individual cases, parties may also ask a judge to step aside under the federal recusal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 455.

There is no fixed timeline, and not every complaint moves through every stage.

Can the DOJ Force the Minnesota Judges to Recuse From DHS Cases?

The DOJ has asked for recusal from DHS-related civil and criminal matters, but filing the request does not establish that recusal is required. Recusal is governed by separate law and ethics rules, including when a judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Whether it is required will depend on the standards and facts for each judge. The complaint does not automatically remove any judge from any case.

Can a Judicial Misconduct Complaint Overturn a Judge’s Ruling?

No. The federal judiciary says the complaint process cannot be used to challenge the correctness of a ruling. Appeals are the remedy for legal error. The complaint also does not decide whether Operation Metro Surge was lawful or change any immigration law.

What the Minnesota Judges Complaint Does Not Establish

The filing does not establish that the judges committed misconduct, are biased against the government, must step aside from every immigration case, will be removed from office or violated any criminal law, or that their underlying rulings were wrong. It establishes only that the DOJ has formally alleged misconduct and requested an investigation and recusal.

Minnesota Federal Judges Misconduct Complaint FAQ

Why did the DOJ file the complaint?

It says seven Minnesota federal judges improperly discussed immigration enforcement and pending or impending cases in New York Times interviews.

Which judges are named?

Judge Patrick J. Schiltz and Judge John R. Tunheim are named. Others are referred to anonymously.

What is the DOJ asking the Eighth Circuit to do?

Investigate the alleged misconduct and require recusal from DHS-related matters.

Have the judges been found guilty of misconduct?

No. The filing is an allegation that starts a review process.

What do the judges say?

They say legal-ethics experts concluded their comments were within the ethics rules, citing the February 2026 advisory opinion.

Can federal judges speak publicly about the legal system?

Yes, within limits. Canon 4 allows speaking about the law, the legal system and the administration of justice, but Canon 3(A)(6) bars comment on the merits of pending or impending matters.

Why is the Eighth Circuit handling it?

Minnesota’s federal district court is in the Eighth Circuit.

Does the complaint mean the judges will lose their jobs?

Not automatically. Any action would depend on the process and findings.

What to Watch Next in the Minnesota Judges Complaint

The next step is Chief Judge Colloton’s review. The case raises a broader question about where the line falls between a judge’s duty of impartiality and a judge’s freedom to discuss the judiciary and judicial independence.

This article is general information, not legal advice. AllAboutLawyer.com is not a law firm. The allegations are allegations in a DOJ complaint and are not established findings.

Sources: U.S. Department of Justice press release and Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (Sept. 30, 2026); Code of Conduct for United States Judges (U.S. Courts); U.S. Courts FAQs and Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings; Eighth Circuit judicial complaints page; U.S. Courts published advisory opinions of the Committee on Codes of Conduct; FOX 9, CBS News, Associated Press and Washington Post reporting; 28 U.S.C. §§ 351–364 and 455.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against the DOJ’s September 30, 2026 complaint and press release, U.S. Courts and Eighth Circuit materials and major news reporting, as of October 1, 2026. Last Updated: October 1, 2026.