A federal judge who took the extraordinary step of holding a government lawyer in contempt of court earlier this week blasted the Justice Department for its handling of immigration cases on Friday, accusing the department’s Minneapolis office of skirting orders and blaming staffing shortages “again, and again, and again.”

The order adds to months of sparring between federal judges and the Trump administration, as Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s mass deportation efforts cause an unprecedented flood of legal cases by detainees seeking to be released. Several judges in Minnesota have accused ICE of failing to follow orders in those cases.

In a hearing Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Laura Provinzino held an Army lawyer who was assigned to the Justice Department in civil contempt. She ordered the lawyer, Matthew Isihara, to pay $500 per day until the government returned identification documents to Rigoberto Soto Jimenez, who was released by ICE in Texas without his ID last week despite a court order requiring him to be flown back to Minnesota with his personal property. 

After the government quickly gave back the man’s documents, Provinzino lifted the contempt finding on Friday. She said no fines would be issued against Isihara, an Army lawyer who was temporarily assigned to assist the Justice Department last month.

But in a nine-page order on Friday, Provinzino sharply criticized the federal government’s actions in the case — and argued it was not an isolated incident.

Provinzino said Isihara “had taken no action to ensure compliance with the Court’s order, notwithstanding the fact that it was his responsibility to communicate the Court’s order to ICE to effectuate [Soto Jimenez’s] lawful release.”

She cited Isihara’s comments at Wednesday’s hearing, where he acknowledged that he didn’t immediately send Provinzino’s release order to ICE, and didn’t get back to Soto Jimenez’s lawyer when asked for help in transporting him to Minnesota and returning his IDs. 

Isihara was apologetic at the hearing, saying the case “slipped through the cracks” and he “dropped the ball.” He said the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minneapolis — which has faced a surge of ICE arrests and a wave of resignations in recent months — has been overwhelmed by the sheer number of requests to release detainees, which are known as habeas corpus petitions.

Still, Provinzino rejected that defense, writing that “administrative burden has never been a reason to sacrifice the constitutional and statutory rights of individuals.” 

She also said “the Government has offered that excuse to this Court again, and again, and again (and to other judges in this district again,and again, and again, and again, and again, and again) to excuse its oversights and disobedience of court orders in immigration habeas cases.” 

Provinzino said she has been patient with the U.S. Attorney’s office in the past. 

“But at this point, the refrain of ‘understaffing’ and ‘too many cases’ has worn out its welcome, particularly when it comes at the expense of individual rights,” she wrote. “This Court would never allow a private attorney or litigant to rely on an ‘I’m too busy’ excuse to justify disobedience of a court order. The Government is no different.”

And the judge argued that “it has become painfully clear over the past several months that the attorneys working on immigration habeas cases lack the basic resources and, in some cases, training necessary to comply with judicial orders.”

The issue has “real consequences on real human beings,” the judge continued. In Soto Jimenez’s case, after he was released in Texas without his IDs last week, he stayed in a shelter for a night until his lawyer could arrange a flight back to Minnesota, where the Mexican citizen has lived with his lawful permanent resident wife since 2018.

CBS News has reached out to the Justice Department for comment.

Going forward, Provinzino said she expects government lawyers who become aware that an order might be violated to inform the court “promptly.” She said she would “look favorably on such submissions” and avoid holding those lawyers in contempt.

“What the Court will not tolerate is what happened here: disobedience and radio silence from the Government,” the judge wrote.