The Growing Judicial Insurrection Against President Donald J. Trump
"This lawlessness is breeding chaos, and rogue judges are feeling increasingly emboldened."
There’s a Constitutional crisis brewing in plain sight.
The nation’s courts have became legalized battlegrounds — and the casualties aren’t being dealt in soldiers, but in blows against our rule of law.
In the lowest branches of our federal court system, a growing cartel of unelected judges are positioning themselves as co-presidents of the United States. They are overruling the elected President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, on vital matters of national security, as well as on the staffing of his executive branch.
This lawlessness is breeding chaos, and rogue judges are feeling increasingly emboldened.
The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland on Tuesday reported about a district court judge named William Alsup who actually reversed himself and said ‘yup, I do have jurisdiction over these lawsuits against Trump Administration for firings.’
The ‘memo' clearly got out. A robed ‘resistance’ has been activated. And as long as the Supreme Court tacitly gives the green light, the lawfare shall commence.
But the center of this judicial confrontation is Judge James Boasberg, who recently blocked the Trump administration’s deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act—a law written specifically to empower presidents to act swiftly against foreign threats during times of invasion or “predatory incursion.”
Trump officials are calling this what it is: a legal insurrection. Judges overriding wartime decisions. National security policy hijacked from the Oval Office and handed to the bench. And in Boasberg’s case, it gets worse.
He issued his ruling while under fire for attending a privately-funded judicial fellowship organized by the Rodel Institute—an organization that, despite calling itself nonpartisan, is funded by foundations and run by individuals who have repeatedly attacked Trump and his policies.
As Just the News reported, among the speakers were law professors who condemned Trump’s immigration enforcement, and the conference’s overarching theme echoed the Democratic Party’s 2024 campaign slogan of “saving democracy.” Boasberg has not denied the details. He just never recused himself.
“The conference was part of the Rodel Institute’s Judicial Fellowship and each of the judges in attendance -- including Boasberg -- was a first-year fellow, according to the institute's website,” the report said. “Rodel, in turn, is funded by the same foundations who often sponsor anti-Trump programs and publications, including”:
The Henry Luce Foundation, which funds groups such as the Migration Policy Institute, which recently claimed the Trump administration “bends U.S. government in extraordinary ways towards aim of mass deportations." The Luce Foundation has been also been a funder of the "Documented" immigration group, which describes itself as "a newsroom dedicated to reporting with and for immigrant communities in New York City." That group recently lamented "the plight of the Venezuelan diaspora — criminalized both in their home country and the United States" because of Trump;
The Rockefeller Brothers Fund, which has over the years donated considerable cash to the The Brennan Center for Justice, which in turn opposes Trump's policies in litigation and by organizing events attacking those policies; and
The Hewlett Foundation (which was a longtime supporter of the group when it was still part of the Aspen Institute too) which also proclaimed its less-than-flattering view of Trump as follows: “In a recent nadir, the attack on the counting of electoral votes in the Capitol on January 6, 2021, in the aftermath of which 147 G.O.P. legislators still voted in support of President Trump’s baseless efforts to overturn the election results, has further rendered the fabric of congressional civility and tolerance. Even that nadir, as severe as it was, may have been superseded by the subsequent inability of Congress even to agree to investigate the Capitol riot.”
This is not conducive to equal justice under the law—this is indicative of activist judges participating in judicial lawfare.
The Trump administration’s response has been swift and pointed. The Justice Department is refusing to comply with Boasberg’s discovery demands, invoking the state secrets privilege to protect classified intelligence about the deportation flights.
“The court has all of the facts it needs to address the compliance issues before it,” the DOJ said in a filing. “Further intrusions on the executive branch would present dangerous and wholly unwarranted separation-of-powers harms with respect to diplomatic and national security concerns that the court lacks competence to address.”
According to the DOJ, revealing more would endanger national security and harm diplomatic relations. Their message is unambiguous: the judiciary has no business inserting itself into executive operations involving sensitive counter-terrorism operations across borders.
The Department of Justice itself is signaling that Boasberg has gone too far. In public filings, it has essentially told the court that the case is over. The relevant deportations have occurred. The judiciary has no grounds to continue fishing through classified operations. As Rep. Matt Gaetz noted during a House Judiciary briefing, this kind of judicial interference is not review—it’s obstruction.
Boasberg’s ruling neuters a president’s ability to act swiftly in the face of a violent foreign cartel. His participation in a politically charged event taints the appearance of fairness. And the refusal to recuse in a case directly affecting Trump policies is, frankly, indefensible.
Meanwhile, Boasberg is not the only judge raising alarms. In a separate immigration ruling, Judge Patricia Millett claimed that Trump-era deportation policies treated migrants worse than Nazis—an outrageous historical distortion.
"Nazis got better treatment under the alien Enemy Act than has happened here," she claimed, adding, "you all could have picked me up on a Saturday and thrown me on a plane."
The judge needs a history refresher. During World War II, President Roosevelt’s administration captured, tried, and executed six Nazi saboteurs, including Herbie Haupt, a U.S. citizen. They were not coddled with court hearings—they were swiftly dealt with as enemy agents. The idea that the modern judiciary would suggest today's deportees are more harshly treated than literal Nazi infiltrators isn’t just wrong—it’s dishonest.
This is not just a legal dispute. It’s a constitutional clash over who controls immigration policy in the United States: elected leaders or unaccountable judges.
And increasingly, Trump’s base—and much of the broader conservative movement—sees what’s happening as a deliberate power grab. Judges like Boasberg are no longer referees. They’re players on the field, picking a side, rewriting the rules, and calling it justice.
This isn’t how a constitutional republic is supposed to function. The courts are not immune from scrutiny. Congress should move quickly to ban privately funded judicial junkets, investigate political entanglements among federal judges, and pass legislation like the No Rogue Rulings Act to rein in judicial overreach.
The American people did not elect Judge Boasberg. They elected a president. It’s time Washington—and the judiciary—serve him a painful reminder. If these judges aren’t punished for their lawlessness dressed up in legalese, it will open the floodgates to a collapse of confidence in our judicial system. After that, it will be absolute chaos.
James Boasberg needs to be let go. He is not appointed by life, he is a newer Judge, he was involved in the Trump Russia Hoax, should recuse himself from anything Trump. Bossbaby can be released from his role, when he is not in good behavior.
‘Insurrection’ 😂