A federal appeals court in a 2-1 decision Monday declined to immediately block a judge’s order that the Trump administration reinstate fired probationary employees at six federal agencies.

The new ruling, which does not address the legality of the firings, refuses the administration’s request for an administrative stay that would temporarily freeze the ruling until the next stage of the appeal.

“Given that the district court found that the employees were wrongfully terminated and ordered an immediate return to the status quo ante, an administrative stay of the district court’s order would not preserve the status quo,” the court wrote in its ruling. “It would do just the opposite — it would disrupt the status quo and turn it on its head.”

Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) introduced a resolution to impeach U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who over the weekend ordered the Trump administration to halt deportations of Venezuelans whom it said were gang members.

The move comes as President Trump is also calling for Boasberg’s impeachment, as the administration argues that his ruling, blocking Trump from invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to swiftly deport the migrants, was not lawful.

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Tuesday pushed back at that statement, saying it had been established that “impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”

Fears that the Trump administration might deliberately break into a pattern of not following judicial rulings with which it disagrees were amplified last month when a federal judge in Rhode Island, for the second time, told the Trump administration it can’t cut off grant and loan payments after Democratic-led states complained that the administration wasn’t obeying the judge’s previous court order.

[...]

The most likely response by a court if the administration were to defy its edict would be to hold the agency acting in defiance of an order or ruling in civil contempt, which would allow a judge to levy fines on the government for its non-compliance, experts told CNN.

[...]

David Cole, a Georgetown Law professor who has repeatedly argued cases before the Supreme Court on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union, predicted that the most likely penalty a president would face for defying a court order would be political – not legal.

“The response,” Cole predicted, “would be to punish the Republican Party.”