Tag: judges

Judge who blocked Trump deportations took junket to event with anti-Trump speakers, sponsor

Months before he blocked President Donald Trump’s deportations of illegal alien gang members, U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg attended a privately-funded legal conference in Idaho that featured sponsors and speakers who have expressed clear anti-Trump sentiments — particularly on immigration — and a theme that echoed the Democrat Party’s 2024 stated mission of saving democracy, according to a judicial ethics report.

Boasberg was one of nine Democrat-appointed judges and three Trump nominated jurists to attend the conference in ritzy Sun Valley, where two of the four sessions were titled “Role of Judges in a Democracy” and the “State of Democracy,” the report shows.

Called a “Privately Funded Seminar Disclosure Report,” the document discloses that Boasberg was in attendance, but offers no details of whether Boasberg was paid for his attendance or travel, or what the remuneration was. 

Overseen by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, the ethical rules governing federal judges require that a private entity who “issues an invitation to a federal judge to attend an educational program as a speaker, panelist, or attendee and offers to pay for or reimburse that judge, in excess of $480, must disclose financial and programmatic information.” The rules do not require a specific accounting for each judge, or even how much was paid to judges at all.

You can view that disclosure here, which is also linked to the official website of the D.C. District Court.

BoasbergDisclosureReport.pdf

Just the News was alerted to the conference and to Boasberg’s attendance by a retired Democrat-appointed judge, who was concerned the July 2024 conference’s focus on judges’ role in a democracy was too close to a political party’s theme for comfort. He declined to be named.

It is possible that his “payment” was merely reimbursement for expenses, but Boasberg did not respond to a request for comment from Just the News.

Keep reading

Disobedience to Judges is Obedience to the Constitution

Judge James Boasberg issued an oral order demanding that planes carrying Venezuelan gang members, who were not even a party to the lawsuit before him and over which he did not have jurisdiction, be turned around in international airspace. Boasberg is now infuriated that his mere utterance, not even set down in writing, was not immediately obeyed.

Democrats and their media have taken to crying that any disobedience of Boasberg, who was appointed by Barack Obama to apparently rule not only the entire country, but the planet and all its airspace, is a “threat to democracy” and a violation of checks and balances.

It’s not. If anything, it’s an urgently needed restoration of those checks and balances which have been trampled on by judges who have seized unlimited power from elected officials like Trump.

Boasberg’s coup began when the D.C. judge decided to hear a lawsuit from the ACLU based on the detention of four inmates in Texas and one in New York. Despite it being the entirely wrong venue, Boasberg took the case. The 5 inmates who were on average 1,500 miles away from Boasberg denied that they were members of the Tren de Aragua gang targeted by Trump. Despite that, they claimed they were at risk of deportation because Trump had invoked the Alien Enemies Act and demanded that Boasberg block a 200-year-old plus law that predates D.C.

The lack of minor matters like venue and standing didn’t stop Boasberg from blocking the implementation of a law that predates the White House, the Capitol and the entire principle of ‘judicial review’ that only came 5 years later in Marbury v. Madison before issuing an oral order turning around planes in midair. King George III would have been less presumptuous.

There’s a term for this that ends in a ‘y’ and it’s not ‘democracy’.

Keep reading

Judge Boasberg Grills DOJ Lawyers AGAIN Over Deportation of Criminal Aliens, Threatens Trump Admin with Consequences if They Violate His Court Order

Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, once again grilled DOJ lawyers about the Trump Administration’s move to deport dangerous Venezuelan aliens under the Alien Enemies Act.

A showdown between Boasberg and the Trump DOJ played out in court this week after the judge issued an order forcing planes en route to Central and South America carrying dangerous Venezuelan aliens to turn around and come back to the US.

On Sunday, the Trump DOJ provided an update to Boasberg’s order and said the criminal aliens were outside of US territory when the order came down.

The DOJ argued that the Judge has zero jurisdiction over international airspace.

The Justice Department also refused to give Judge James Boasberg sensitive information in a case against Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act.

This angered the judge and he insisted that disclosing sensitive information won’t put state secrets in danger because Secretary of State Marco Rubio has publicly spoken about the deportation flights.

“Defendants shall have until March 20, 2025, at 12:00 p.m. to provide the information discussed in the Minute Order of March 18, 2025, or to invoke the state-secrets doctrine and explain the basis for such invocation,” the judge wrote on Wednesday.

The Thursday noon deadline passed and Judge Boasberg once again lashed out at the DOJ’s response as “woefully insufficient.”

Keep reading

Obama Judge Pushes Back After Ruling Attacking DOGE is So “Weirdly Written” and “Overly Broad” That It Could Lead to IMMEDIATE Shutdown of Social Security Administration

A federal judge on Thursday barred DOGE from accessing social security systems.

US District Judge Ellen Hollander, an Obama appointee, said DOGE’s workers are on a “fishing expedition.”

“The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion. It has launched a search for the proverbial needle in the haystack, without any concrete knowledge that the needle is actually in the haystack,” Judge Hollander wrote.

Far-left organizations like AFL-CIO, the American Federation of Teachers and other plaintiffs sued the Social Security Administration, Elon Musk, DOGE and other Trump advisors.

“The plaintiffs are the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO (“AFSCME”); Alliance for Retired Americans (“ARA” or “Alliance”); and American Federation of Teachers (“AFT”). They have sued the Social Security Administration; Leland Dudek, in his official capacity as “purported Acting Commissioner” of the SSA; Michael Russo, in his official capacity as Chief Information Officer (“CIO”) of the Agency; Elon Musk, in his official capacity as “Senior Advisor to the President and de facto head of” the Department of Government Efficiency; the “U.S. DOGE Service”; the U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization; and Amy Gleason, in her official capacity as the DOGE Acting Administrator,” the court document read.

The judge sided with the plaintiffs and said DOGE is likely violating privacy laws with access to social security numbers and other personal information.

On Friday Acting Social Security commissioner Leland Dudek told the Washington Post in an interview that he will likely file an affidavit asking Judge Hollander to clarify her ruling, calling the language “ambiguous,” “overly broad,” and “weirdly written.”

“[In] an interview Friday with The Washington Post, Dudek argued that the judge’s ruling was overly broad and that a reference to “DOGE affiliates” could apply to all employees who access personally identifiable information, or PII, because they are obligated to cooperate with DOGE,” The Washington Post reported.

“Everything in this agency is PII,” Dudek told The Post. “Unless I get clarification, I’ll just start to shut it down. I don’t have much of a choice here.”

Dudek’s comments created a media firestorm, prompting Judge Hollander to issue a letter clarifying her language.

Keep reading

DOJ May Invoke State Secrets Privilege In Showdown With Federal Judge, Agency Says

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is considering invoking its state secrets privilege in its showdown with a federal judge over the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act and deportation of illegal immigrants, a high-ranking DOJ official said in a new court filing submitted Friday.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, a former criminal defense lawyer for President Donald Trump, confirmed a statement issued by Robert Cerna, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official, in court papers filed earlier this week in the case that Cabinet secretaries under Trump “are currently actively considering whether to invoke the state secrets privilege.”

“I attest to the accuracy of those statements based on personal knowledge of the events described by Mr. Cerna,” Blanche wrote, “including my direct involvement in ongoing Cabinet-level discussion regarding invocation of the state-secrets privilege.”

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg told government officials that they have a Friday deadline to submit a sworn declaration by a person “with direct involvement in the Cabinet-level discussions” about the state secrets privilege and to tell the court by next Tuesday whether the government will invoke it.

Invoking the state secrets privilege—an evidentiary rule used under U.S. legal precedent—means that government lawyers can assert that court proceedings may divulge sensitive state information that may endanger national security.

Keep reading

Rep. Andy Ogles Drafts Article of Impeachment Against Longtime Democrat Activist Judge Over Ruling That DOGE Likely Violated Constitution by Shutting Down USAID

Representative Andy Ogles (R-TN) has drafted an Article of Impeachment against radical activist U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang.

This decisive action comes in direct response to Judge Chuang’s recent ruling, which obstructed the Trump administration’s efforts to streamline government operations by dismantling the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

Judge Chuang, an appointee of Barack Obama, issued a 68-page opinion asserting that the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) initiative to dissolve USAID likely violated the Constitution.

He ordered the restoration of email and computer access to all USAID employees, including those placed on administrative leave, effectively halting the administration’s cost-cutting measures.

Representative Ogles asserts that Judge Chuang’s ruling oversteps judicial boundaries and undermines the executive branch’s authority to manage federal agencies.

In a post on X, Ogles wrote, “An Obama appointee and lifelong Democrat who blocked Trump’s travel ban in 2017. This judge literally peddled critical race theory as editor of the Harvard Law Review. Now he’s trying to save USAID, which gives money to terrorist and radical LGBTQ+ propaganda. Impeach him!”

Keep reading

REVEALED: Chief Justice John Roberts Caught in Elitist Club of Judges and Lawyers That Includes James Boasberg, Beryl Howell, Amit Mehta and Ketanji Brown Jackson

Investigative journalist Bad Kitty Unleashed reported on Thursday that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is involved in an invite-only club for elite judges in Washington, DC.

The elitist club America Inns of Court also includes the radical America-hating judges James Boasberg, Beryl Howell, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Amit Mehta—all hard-left judges and Trump-haters.

John Roberts has been Chief Justice of the Supreme Court since September 2005.

The Supreme Court Chief Justice is holding meetings with far-left district judges who are running a judicial coup on the current President of the United States!

Just think, two days ago, on Tuesday, Chief Justice Roberts released a statement attacking President Donald Trump for calling on these same crooked District judges to be impeached!

And now we have evidence that John Roberts was in an elitist group with these same judges!

Here is what Roberts said to the US President, who is under siege by the judicial branch.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

Keep reading

President Trump Issues a Dire Warning as Radical-Left Judges Continue to Sabotage his Agenda – Also Calls Out Chief Justice John Roberts

President Trump has had enough of the far-left activist judges subverting his agenda and making a mockery of the U.S. Constitution.

As The Gateway Pundit has extensively reported, these black-robed tyrants have used their unhinged hatred toward the 47th President as an excuse to override many of his perfectly legal executive orders. These include crazy rulings overturning the military’s transgender ban, blocking attempts to deport dangerous illegal aliens, and several rulings against DOGE.

Late Thursday night, Trump responded to all of this by issuing a dire warning: the danger of this judicial activism is so “unparalleled” it could lead to the end of America.

How can a President do his job when the courts will sabotage him every step of the way?

“Unlawful Nationwide Injunctions by Radical Left Judges could very well lead to the destruction of our Country! These people are Lunatics, who do not care, even a little bit, about the repercussions from their very dangerous and incorrect Decisions and Rulings,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, “Lawyers endlessly search the United States for these Judges, and file lawsuits as quickly as they find them. It is then the obligation of Law abiding Agencies of Government to have these “Orders” overturned. The danger is unparalleled!”

Trump continued by pointing out the ‘judges’ wanted the full power of the presidency with none of the responsibilities. Trump added that his job requires him to make rapid decisions with lives potentially hanging in the balance.

“These Judges want to assume the Powers of the Presidency, without having to attain 80 Million Votes. They want all of the advantages with none of the risks,” he continued. “Again, a President has to be allowed to act quickly and decisively about such matters as returning murderers, drug lords, rapists, and other such type criminals back to their Homeland, or to other locations that will allow our Country to be SAFE.”

He then called out Chief Justice John Roberts, who is currently hiding under his desk while these leftist ‘judges’ try to destroy America.

“It is our goal to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, and such a high aspiration can never be done if Radical and Highly Partisan Judges are allowed to stand in the way of JUSTICE. STOP NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS NOW, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE,” Trump concluded. “If Justice Roberts and the United States Supreme Court do not fix this toxic and unprecedented situation IMMEDIATELY, our Country is in very serious trouble!”

Keep reading

Judge Orders Bureau of Prisons to Return Transgender Inmates to Women’s Facilities, Reversing Trump’s Protective Order

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, a Ronald Reagan appointee, ordered the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) on Wednesday to transfer two transgender inmates—biological men who identify as women—back to federal women’s prisons.

This move comes after they were originally relocated to men’s facilities following President Donald Trump’s executive order that limited transgender protections in federal custody.

The decision, which conservatives are blasting as a blatant reversal of common-sense protections for female inmates, grants a preliminary injunction for the two individuals—identified as “Rachel” and “Ellen Doe,” ABC News reported.

Lamberth’s ruling mandates not only the immediate transfer of the two individuals but also compels the Bureau of Prisons to continue providing them with hormone therapy treatments for gender dysphoria.

The ruling follows complaints from the plaintiffs that they felt unsafe in male prisons, alleging threats of sexual assault and inappropriate searches by male officers.

“The fact that they have already been transferred and, allegedly, have been abused at their new facilities can only strengthen their claims of irreparable harm,” Lamberth wrote in his decision.

Under Trump’s policies, biological sex—not gender identity—determined where inmates were placed, helping to prevent cases where violent offenders or opportunistic criminals claimed transgender status to gain access to female-only spaces.

But with Lamberth’s order, those protections are being eroded, and the floodgates are opening once again for a dangerous precedent. The decision impacts at least 15 inmates who are currently covered under similar lawsuits.

Meanwhile, three other prisoners—one transgender woman housed in a men’s prison and two transgender men in women’s prisons—are also challenging Trump’s order, hoping to fully dismantle the remaining safeguards against gender-based prison transfers, according to ABC News.

There are reports of transgender women or individuals posing as transgender women raping female inmates in US prisons.

Keep reading

Gangsters, Terrorists, And Deep State Judicial Tyranny

The primary purpose of the federal judiciary is to make sure that anything the federal government does is almost never, ever, ruled to be unconstitutional. This is Hamilton’s constitutional regime. A believer in unlimited government, Alexander Hamilton’s constitutional belief was that the constitution can and should be used as a rubber stamp on unlimited government — as long as the government is run by “well behaved” politicians like himself, he insisted. His political nemesis, Thomas Jefferson, took the opposite view that the government needed to be “bound by the chains of the Constitution.”

Andrew Napolitano pointed out in his book, The Constitution in Exile, that the federal government’s “supreme” court did not rule a single federal law to be unconstitutional from 1935 to 1997. The eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Jeffersonians warned that if the day ever arrived that the federal government, through its judiciary, would be the sole arbiter of constitutionality Americans would then live under a tyranny. That judicial tyranny was cemented into place in April of 1865 with the destruction of the rights of nullification and secession and the evisceration of the Tenth Amendment – the real purposes of the “Civil War.” 

The latest example of our bullying and tyrannical federal judiciary is Chief Justice John Roberts’ nasty rebuke of President Trump’s recommendation of impeaching a federal judge who issued one of those Stalinist-sounding federal judicial “decrees” saying that the president has no authority to deport illegal aliens who have committed such felonies as rape and murder, as he did with over 200 members of a notorious El Salvadoran criminal gang. 

Americans – and American presidents – were not always bullied by black-robed totalitarians. They once understood that there are three branches of the federal government, not just the judicial branch, and that federal judges are not black-robed deities. President Andrew Jackson, who President Trump apparently reveres, is a good example of such a president. After Chief Justice John Marshall “ruled” in 1819 (McCulloch v. Maryland) that the Second Bank of the United States (BUS), a precursor of the Fed, was constitutional despite not being one of the delegate powers in Article 1, Section 8, and despite its being voted down during the constitutional convention, Jackson voiced his disagreement by vetoing the recharter of the BUS in 1832. 

Keep reading