Who do courts rely on to enforce orders?
While federal judges have clear authority to order sanctions, including fines and arrest, they ultimately rely on law enforcement and federal prosecutors to enforce penalties in the face of continued noncompliance. The U.S. Marshals Service, which is part of the Justice Department, is the primary enforcement arm of the federal courts. Courts often rely on marshals to serve summonses, subpoenas, and warrants, as well as make arrests, and by law, “it is the primary role and mission of the United States Marshals Service to . . . obey, execute, and enforce all orders of” the federal courts.
Courts also largely rely on federal prosecutors to pursue findings of criminal contempt. In most cases, the relevant U.S. attorney’s office will accept a criminal contempt case at the request of the court and prosecute it as they would any other alleged violation of criminal law. However, judges are authorized to appoint private attorneys to prosecute criminal contempt charges in the rare instances when the U.S. attorney declines to accept the case. (In 2023, the Supreme Court declined to hear a petition by environmental lawyer Steve Donzinger, who claimed his criminal contempt prosecution by an appointed private attorney was unconstitutional.)
= new reply since forum marked as read