Trump pushes to impeach ‘troublemaker’ judge as major conflict of interest is discovered
Multiple district court judges across the country, many with reputations as left-leaning activists, have been busy since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, issuing nationwide injunctions to try to prevent him from implementing his policies for the executive branch.
More than 100 cases remain to be decided, with expectations many will reach the Supreme Court in one form or another.
But the courts’ lawfare against the president has created what many analysts have suggested is a constitutional crisis, with the judges’ deliberate interference in the constitutional responsibilities of the president.
Now Trump is responding, in one specific case, with a call for the judge to be removed.
On Truth Social, Trump cited the activism of James Boasberg, a federal judge in Washington who was appointed by Barack Obama, who had demanded that terrorists being deported by the Trump administration be returned to the U.S.
That order was unsuccessful in that situation, because over the weekend the planes loaded with deportees he wanted back in the U.S. already were in international airspace, so his ruling had no effect.
Trump’s statement:
This Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, was not elected President – He didn’t WIN the popular VOTE (by a lot!), he didn’t WIN ALL SEVEN SWING STATES, he didn’t WIN 2,750 to 525 Counties, HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING! I WON FOR MANY REASONS, IN AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE, BUT FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY. I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!
Further, investigative journalist Laura Loomer revealed there appears to be a huge conflict of interest for Boasberg, suggesting he should have, under ethics standards, removed himself from the case.
BREAKING: Less than 12 hours after I exposed Judge James Boasberg’s conflict of interest with his daughter Katharine Boasberg, who works for a 501c3 called “Partners For Justice” @PFJ_USA that gives criminal illegal aliens and gang members legal advice,
Katharine Boasberg has… https://t.co/b0E0bW7t4C pic.twitter.com/1BMjQAvLjh— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) March 18, 2025
She explained, “Less than 12 hours after I exposed Judge James Boasberg’s conflict of interest with his daughter Katharine Boasberg, who works for a 501c3 called ‘Partners For Justice’ @PFJ_USA that gives criminal illegal aliens and gang members legal advice, Katharine Boasberg has DELETED her @LinkedIn page and her Instagram account. I have exclusively uncovered a massive CONFLICT OF INTEREST involving Judge James Boasberg, the Chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Judge Boasberg recently made the decision to prevent the deportation of criminal illegal alien gang members on planes out of the country. This is enough for President Trump’s legal team to push for a MOTION FOR RECUSAL for Judge Boasberg.”
It’s not the first time such a situation has arisen for a judge working on a lawfare case against Trump. When Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg wildly claimed that business reporting misdemeanors, for which the statute of limitations already had passed, actually were felonies and put Trump on trial, Judge Juan Merchan allowed testimony from a former porn star and a convicted perjurer to be used against Trump to obtain a conviction.
It also was revealed that Merchan’s daughter is a Democrat operative who was advising campaigns, and making money off the decisions her father was making against Trump in court.
Boasberg, meanwhile, has demanded the Trump administration explain why it didn’t order the airplanes deporting terrorists and gang members over the weekend to turn around in the air as he had ordered.
In fact, he issued a verbal order, and then followed that with a slightly different written order. The administration said it followed the written order, but in fact, the airplanes already were outside U.S. territorial jurisdiction.
Boasberg claimed that the administration knew he was holding a hearing on those deportations, and presumably should have waited for him to make his demands known.
ILLEGAL ALIENS: Download the CBP Home App – Now Available on All App Stores
Do it the easy way, or get deported the hard way. pic.twitter.com/Kb3GgAl7it
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) March 18, 2025
— Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) March 18, 2025
He insisted his “equitable powers” should attach to a plane even if it has departed the U.S. and is in “international airspace.”
Deputy Associate Attorney General Abhishek Kambli pointed out that Boasberg’s written order did not contain demands to bring those airplanes back, and he was too late anyway.
Boasberg had ordered that the administration was not allowed to deport anyone it its custody under the Alien Enemies Act, an existing federal law.
Boasberg insisted he could halt the administration’s efforts to remove criminals from the country, demanding, “You shall inform your clients of this immediately, and that any plane containing these folks that is going to take off or is in the air needs to be returned to the United States.”
But two airplanes that had departed a Texas detention facility already had been in the air an hour at that time.
They continued to El Salvador, which had agreed to hold the gang members in a notorious prison.
El Salvador President Nayib Bukele later said on social media, “Oopsie…too late” regarding an article about Boasberg’s demands.
The White House has argued a federal judge lacks the authority to control the president’s decisions regarding when a country is being invaded under the law, or how to defend it.
The unprecedented work by trial court judges to block Trump’s agendas, including deporting criminal aliens, eliminating fraud, waste and corruption in the executive branch spending, and more, already is being described by analysts as a constitutional crisis for the country.
The Washington Examiner explained, “A grave threat to democracy was revealed during the first weeks of President Donald Trump’s second term. But it does not emanate from the White House. Judges, acting in coordination with left-wing activist groups, are abusing the judicial power to thwart the will of the people and undermine temperate and deliberate jurisprudence.”
Already some of the questions have been submitted to the Supreme Court.
The report explained, “The power of courts to enjoin parties from taking action to prevent harm to a litigant is older than the Constitution, stretching back to English common law. This tradition is preserved in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which allow a party to secure a preliminary injunction if he establishes that ‘he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.'”
It continued, “This is a high bar. It typically means a court’s power to limit a party’s actions is confined to named plaintiffs in the suit. This can make challenges to federal government actions tricky because any national policy, such as a nationwide employer vaccine mandate, could affect almost everyone.”
Nationwide injunctions historically have been used rarely, except against President Trump.
And the report noted, “Justices Clarence Thomes, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh have voiced concern over the practice, with Gorsuch writing, ‘The routine issuance of universal injunctions is patently unworkable, sowing chaos for litigants, the government, courts, and all those affected by these conflicting decisions.'”
The judges even have resorted to interfering in presidential policy, the report said.
“One judge who blocked Trump’s order ending birthright citizenship went so far as to order the administration not even to write legal guidance on how the executive order should be implemented. How can courts evaluate the legality of a policy if a single judge prevents the federal government from even outlining how a policy should be implemented?”
‘Stop this’: Trump team defies judge’s order to halt deportations of violent ‘monsters’