Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem struggled to answer a series of pointed questions Tuesday during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about repeated violations of federal court orders by immigration agents.

The tense exchange unfolded as lawmakers pressed Noem for answers following mounting criticism from federal judges who say Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials have repeatedly ignored court rulings tied to immigration detentions.

The hearing marked Noem’s first appearance before the committee since a controversial federal operation in Minnesota known as “Operation Metro Surge,” which has drawn national attention after a series of killings carried out by federal authorities.

During the hearing, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin, a Democrat from Illinois, confronted Noem with alarming claims from federal courts.

Durbin cited a warning issued just days earlier by Chief U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Schiltz, a Republican-appointed judge in Minnesota, who said immigration agents had violated more than 200 court orders in just two months.

The judge warned that the court had repeatedly been forced to threaten contempt proceedings in order to compel federal officials to follow judicial rulings.

“The court is not aware of another occasion in the history of the United States in which a federal court has had to threaten contempt again and again and again to force the U.S. government to comply with court orders,” Durbin quoted from Schiltz’s statement.

The senator noted that Minnesota was not the only state where courts have raised alarm.

Durbin also referenced admissions made by lawyers from the Trump administration’s Justice Department during proceedings in New Jersey.

According to those filings, federal authorities acknowledged that immigration officials had violated court orders dozens of times in recent weeks.

In one case overseen by U.S. District Judge Zahid Quraishi, the government admitted to violating at least 56 court orders and was accused of breaking as many as 72, according to court filings.

Another federal judge in the state recently criticized ICE for transferring detainees despite explicit court instructions not to do so, describing the pattern as repeated violations of judicial authority over a short period of time.

Durbin then asked Noem a simple but critical question.

“Secretary Noem, is DHS required to follow federal court orders?”

Noem responded confidently.

“Yes, sir, and we do comply with federal court orders,” she said.

But the senator quickly pressed further.

“How do you explain that your agency has repeatedly violated court orders as your own administration has admitted?” Durbin asked.

At that point, Noem appeared to struggle to articulate a clear answer.

“Sir, we follow court orders and when they apply and when the jurisdiction and decision is applicable to a federal agency like ours,” she said.

Her response raised eyebrows because federal district courts generally have authority over federal agencies unless Congress specifically limits that authority.

In immigration detention cases, judges regularly exercise jurisdiction through habeas corpus petitions — a centuries-old legal principle that allows individuals to challenge unlawful detention.

Durbin appeared puzzled by Noem’s answer.

“I’m sorry, would you clarify what you ended that with?” he asked.

Noem then shifted her response, offering a more direct statement.

“We follow court orders when they are given to us,” she said. “Federal court orders we follow. Absolutely.”

But Durbin continued pressing.

“So these judges are wrong?” he asked.

Noem declined to directly challenge the courts’ findings.

“No, I’m not saying that they’re wrong,” she said. “And I can’t speak specifically to that statement that was given.”

The exchange highlighted growing tension between federal courts and immigration authorities as deportation operations have expanded under the Trump administration.

For critics, the allegations raise serious concerns about the rule of law and whether federal agencies are respecting judicial authority.

For now, the issue appears far from settled — and lawmakers made clear they intend to keep pressing the administration for answers.