
Judge Draws Trump's Ire Over Ruling to Stop Deportation Flights
As chief judge of the Federal District Court of the District of Columbia since 2023, Judge James E. Boasberg has been responsible for setting the tone of the court through some of its highest-profile dealings with President Trump, including overseeing the end of grand jury inquiries in both federal cases against Mr. Trump, the 2020 elections case and the president's handling of classified documents.
But in the last several days, Judge Boasberg and his court have been drawn into a battle with the Trump administration over immigration enforcement that threatens, more than anything to date, to pitch the branches of government into a constitutional crisis.
Over the weekend, the Trump administration sent three planes carrying 238 migrants from Venezuela to El Salvador, even as Judge Boasberg ordered a halt to the deportations and turning any planes around. Shortly before the migrants were expelled, Mr. Trump signed an executive order invoking the Alien Enemies Act, a law from 1798 that gives the president power to deport citizens and subjects of any foreign nation with which the United States is at war or which are in the process of an invasion. Mr. Trump's order justified the deportations by accusing the migrants of being members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang that he charged with 'conducting irregular warfare against the territory of the United States both directly and at the direction, clandestine or otherwise,' of President Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela.
On Monday, the threat of a showdown between the executive and the judicial branches appeared to grow, as Justice Department lawyers stonewalled Judge Boasberg and tried to get him removed from the case, refusing to answer any of his questions about the deportation flights and claiming Mr. Trump had unfettered power to remove immigrants from the United States that could not be questioned by the courts. It worsened still after Mr. Trump called for Judge Boasberg's impeachment on his social media platform, Truth Social, and the Supreme Court's chief justice, John G. Roberts, rebuked the idea in a public statement.
Here's more about Judge Boasberg, the jurist going toe-to-toe with the Trump administration.
Who is Judge Boasberg?
Judge Boasberg, who goes by the nickname Jeb, spent his formative years in Washington, D.C., while his father worked for Lyndon B. Johnson's administration. He went to St. Alban's, an all-boys prep school, attended Yale University, where he played basketball and was a member of the secretive Skull and Bones club. During law school at Yale, he lived with Brett Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court justice.
Before Judge Boasberg wore robes, he was a homicide prosecutor in Washington, D.C. President George W. Bush, a fellow Yale and Skull and Bones member, gave him his first job on the bench in 2002, as an associate justice of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Nine years later, former President Barack Obama nominated him to the federal bench in the capital, a position for which he was unanimously confirmed.
In the years since, Judge Boasberg has served on a number of specialized courts. He was on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which approves surveillance warrants, for seven years, rising to become its presiding judge during the first Trump administration. During the first Trump administration, he was also appointed to the U.S. Alien Terrorist Removal Court as its chief judge, a term that ended earlier this year. He took over as chief judge for the Federal District Court of the District of Columbia in 2023, succeeding Beryl A. Howell.
What are some of his notable rulings?
Judge Boasberg has fielded several polarizing cases that were significant for Mr. Trump. In 2016, he ordered the Federal Bureau of Investigation to release nearly 15,000 emails belonging to Hillary Clinton, the former senator and presidential candidate. But he also dismissed lawsuits trying to force the State Department to recover more of her correspondence, upsetting Mr. Trump.
The following year, Judge Boasberg ruled against a group seeking the release of Mr. Trump's tax returns, stating that only Congress or Mr. Trump could choose to publicize them.
He is also the judge that ruled in 2012 against the public release of photos of a deceased Osama bin Laden, finding there were reasonable national security ground to keep them private.
Why is Judge Boasberg in conflict with the administration?
Judge Boasberg delivered the order that prompted the standoff with the Trump administration on Saturday night, stating from the bench that the deportations of Venezuelans should be stopped and the planes brought back to the United States. He made the ruling during a swiftly organized hearing to challenge Mr. Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. Less than an hour later, he delivered a written ruling following up on that order, though the instruction to turn back planes was left out.
The Trump administration maintains that it did not flout a court order because the written order — which they argue is the important one — came only after the flights of migrants that had already taken off for El Salvador. They have also argued that the judge has no power to question the president's deportation authority.
On Monday, Justice Department lawyers wrote a letter to the federal appeals court asking it to remove Judge Boasberg from the case, and arguing that he had engaged in 'highly unusual and improper procedures.' They also refused to answer several of Judge Boasberg's questions regarding the flights in question, asserting that they could not for national security reasons.
What happens next?
Members of the Trump administration, including Tom Homan, his border czar, have promised to continue the deportations, regardless of court rulings. But the case against Mr. Trump's efforts to use the Alien Enemies Act, in a case brought by five Venezuelan migrants in federal custody who fear they could be among the administration's targets, continues.
Judge Boasberg gave the administration a Tuesday deadline to detail how many migrants could theoretically be covered under the Alien Enemies Act. The administration complied, partially — meeting the judge's deadline but again refusing to detail the answers he sought. The parties are due in court again on Friday to argue the merits of the case.
It is unclear what may flow from Mr. Trump's Tuesday morning post asserting that Judge Boasberg 'should be impeached.' The call prompted a rare statement from Chief Justice John G. Roberts of the Supreme Court, who admonished the idea in a statement saying: 'For more than two centuries it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNN
5 minutes ago
- CNN
See moment Trump criticized Musk in Oval Office
See moment Trump criticized Musk in Oval Office President Trump said he was 'very disappointed' with Elon Musk, as the tech billionaire and former adviser continues to blast Trump's massive tax and spending cuts package. The bill is estimated to add $2.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. Musk responded on X in real-time saying that he never saw the bill before it passed and said the elimination of America's electric vehicle tax incentives has nothing to do with his opposition to Trump's bill. 01:15 - Source: CNN Vertical Politics of the Day 16 videos See moment Trump criticized Musk in Oval Office President Trump said he was 'very disappointed' with Elon Musk, as the tech billionaire and former adviser continues to blast Trump's massive tax and spending cuts package. The bill is estimated to add $2.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. Musk responded on X in real-time saying that he never saw the bill before it passed and said the elimination of America's electric vehicle tax incentives has nothing to do with his opposition to Trump's bill. 01:15 - Source: CNN Curtis Yarvin is inspiring a new generation of MAGA CNN's Hadas Gold interviews anti-democracy author Curtis Yarvin about his argument for an all-powerful executive in the White House. 02:24 - Source: CNN DNC Trolls Trump with Taco Truck The Democratic National Committee parked a taco truck outside the RNC headquarters in Washington DC Tuesday, as a way to troll the president over an acronym created by a Financial Times commentator about the president's frequent walk backs and pauses to his tariff's. 00:52 - Source: CNN Musk calls Trump's bill 'disgusting abomination' Elon Musk lashed out at President Donald Trump's agenda bill — which the president is pressuring GOP senators to support — calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' CNN's Kaitlan Collins reports. 00:59 - Source: CNN ICE chief defends agents wearing masks during immigration raids Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons is defending federal immigration agents for wearing masks during raids across the US, citing safety concerns. The tactic has sparked backlash and raised questions about transparency and accountability. 00:58 - Source: CNN Dana Bash presses Trump's budget chief about cancer cuts CNN's Dana Bash presses Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought on the Trump administration's proposal to cut non-defense spending by more than 22% — including deep reductions to education, food assistance, and billions in cancer research funding. As Vought defends the cuts and criticizes the NIH, Bash challenges him on the real-world impact to life-saving medical research. 01:35 - Source: CNN Trump reacts to video of Macron's apparent shove from wife President Trump was asked by reporters about the viral video appearing to show French President Emmanuel Macron being pushed by his wife Brigitte as they disembarked from a plane in Vietnam. Macron, at the time, quickly dismissed the video. 00:34 - Source: CNN Trans high school athlete wins events amid controversy A transgender athlete, whose participation sparked a national controversy and a temporary rule change, took first place in two of her three events in the California High School Track and Field Championship. 01:09 - Source: CNN South Carolina voter says 'no' to moving center South Carolina has often bucked the electoral trend – voting for candidates who lost in Iowa or New Hampshire and thus helping pick which candidate will move on to the general election. CNN's Jeff Simon spoke to multiple voters at a Democrat dinner in Columbia, South Carolina about the party's leadership and future. 01:25 - Source: CNN Hegseth warns 'threat China poses is real' US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking to Asia's premier defense forum in Singapore, delivered a dire warning to the world: China's designs on Taiwan pose a threat to global peace and stability that requires 'our allies and partners do their part on defense.' While Hegseth made clear that Washington does not seek conflict with China, he stressed the Trump administration would not let aggression from Beijing stand. 00:50 - Source: CNN GOP senator pressed on Medicaid in heated town hall GOP Sen. Joni Ernst faced concerns from town hall attendees over potential cuts to Medicaid and SNAP programs as a result of President Donald Trump's sweeping domestic policy bill, saying at one point, 'Well, we all are going to die,' and insisting that those who are eligible for Medicaid will continue to receive payments. 01:12 - Source: CNN Fareed Zakaria breaks down Trump's tariff battle CNN's Fareed Zakaria breaks down what's going on with President Donald Trump's battle with the Supreme Court over tariffs. 00:58 - Source: CNN President Trump's timeline for things seems to almost always be 'in two weeks' President Donald Trump told reporters it will take about 'two weeks' to determine whether Russian President Vladimir Putin is serious about ending the war in Ukraine. That two week timeline, CNN's Abby Phillip says, is a familiar one. 01:48 - Source: CNN President Trump is on a pardoning spree President Donald Trump used his pardon power to grant clemency to a wave of individuals who had been convicted of crimes that range from public corruption, guns and even maritime-related offenses, according to multiple officials. CNN's Kaitlan Collins reports. 00:53 - Source: CNN Trump responds to Wall Street term 'TACO': Trump Always Chickens Out President Donald Trump was asked about "TACO," an acronym that means "Trump Always Chickens Out," which is used by Wall Street workers for his on-and-off approach to tariffs. Calling it "the nastiest question," Trump defended his tariff policy by calling it "negotiation." 01:13 - Source: CNN Harvard students and faculty speak out against Trump Harvard students and faculty spoke to CNN ahead of commencement as Donald Trump said the university should cap foreign enrollment. The Trump administration has recently sought to cancel $100 million in contracts with the school. 02:03 - Source: CNN


Vox
5 minutes ago
- Vox
The Supreme Court's blessedly narrow decision about religion in the workplace, explained
is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he focuses on the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the decline of liberal democracy in the United States. He received a JD from Duke University and is the author of two books on the Supreme Court. In 2018, shortly before Justice Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation shifted the Supreme Court drastically to the right, Democratic Justice Elena Kagan laid out her strategy to keep her Court from becoming too ideological or too partisan. The secret, she said, is to take 'big questions and make them small.' Since then, Kagan and her Democratic colleagues have had mixed success persuading their colleagues to decide cases narrowly when they could hand right-wing litigants a sweeping victory. The Court has largely transformed its approach to religion, for example, though it does occasionally hand down religion cases that end less with a bang than with a whimper. SCOTUS, Explained Get the latest developments on the US Supreme Court from senior correspondent Ian Millhiser. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission will likely be remembered as such a whimper. The opinion is unanimous, and it is authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of Kagan's few fellow Democratic justices. The case could have ended in a sweeping decision that severely undermined the rights of many workers. Instead, Sotomayor's opinion focuses on a very narrow distinction between how Wisconsin law treats some religious groups as compared to others. Catholic Charities involved a Wisconsin law that exempts some nonprofits from paying unemployment taxes. This exemption applies only to employers that operate 'primarily for religious purposes.' Wisconsin's state supreme court determined that a 'religious purpose' includes activities like holding worship services or providing religious education, but it does not include secular services like feeding the poor, even if those secular activities are motivated by religion. Related The Supreme Court is leading a Christian conservative revolution The upshot is that Catholic Charities — an organization that is run by the Catholic Church but focuses primarily on secular charitable work — was not exempt from paying unemployment taxes. Sotomayor's decision reverses the state supreme court, so Catholic Charities will now receive an exemption. The Court largely avoids a fight over when businesses with a religious identity can ignore the law In a previous era, the Court was very cautious about permitting religious organizations to claim exemptions, in part because doing so would give some businesses 'an advantage over their competitors.' Such exemptions could also potentially permit employers with a religious identity to exploit their workers. In Tony and Susan Alamo Foundation v. Secretary of Labor (1985), for example, the Court considered a religious cult that operated a wide range of commercial businesses. These businesses paid no cash salaries or wages, although they did claim to give workers food, clothing, and shelter. The cult sought an exemption from minimum wage laws and similar workplace protections, but the Court disagreed. A too-broad decision in Catholic Charities could have potentially undermined decisions like Alamo Foundation, by giving some employers a broad right to ignore laws protecting their workers. But Sotomayor's opinion reads like it was crafted to hand Catholic Charities the narrowest possible victory. Under the state supreme court's decision in Catholic Charities, Sotomayor writes, a church-run nonprofit that does entirely secular charity work may not receive an exemption from paying unemployment taxes. But a virtually identical nonprofit that does the exact same work but also engages in 'proselytization' or limits its services to members of the same faith would receive an exemption. This distinction, Sotomayor says, violates the Supreme Court's long-standing rule that the government 'may not 'officially prefe[r]' one religious denomination over another.' The state may potentially require all charities to pay unemployment taxes. But it cannot treat religious charities that seek to convert people, or that limit their services to members of one faith, differently from religious charities that do not do this. In Sotomayor's words, an organization's 'eligibility for the exemption ultimately turns on inherently religious choices (namely, whether to proselytize or serve only co-religionists).' The crux of Sotomayor's opinion is that the decision whether to try to convert people, or whether to serve non-Catholics, is an inherently 'theological' choice. And states cannot treat different religious organizations differently because of their theological choices. Unfortunately, Sotomayor's opinion, which is a brief 15 pages, does not really define the term 'theological.' So it is likely that future courts will have to wrestle with whether other laws that treat some organizations differently do so because of theological differences or for some other reason. It's not hard to imagine a cult like the one in Alamo Foundation claiming that it has a theological objection to paying the minimum wage. But the Catholic Charities opinion also does not explicitly undermine decisions like Alamo Foundation. Nor does it embrace a more sweeping approach proposed by dissenting justices in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, who argued that nonprofits whose 'motivations are religious' may claim an exemption — regardless of what that nonprofit actually does.


Fox News
8 minutes ago
- Fox News
Merz says US in 'strong position' to stop Putin, Trump says 'let them fight for a little while'
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told President Donald Trump he is in a "strong position" to stop Russia's war in Ukraine, to which the president suggested maybe the world needs to "let them fight for a little while." "America is again in a very strong position to do something on this war and ending this war," Merz said, while also referencing the U.S.'s role in ending World War II on the eve of the anniversary of D-Day, which marked the turn of events that led to the defeat of Nazi Germany. "So let's talk about what we can do jointly, and we are ready to do what we can." Merz called for more pressure to be placed on Russia in coordination with European allies. Trump responded by providing an analogy of two kids fighting, and suggested perhaps it was "too early" to break up the fight between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. "Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy – they hate each other, and they're fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart, they don't want to be pulled," Trump said. "Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart." Trump said he gave that analogy to Putin in his call with him on Wednesday and said he told the Kremlin chief "maybe you're going to have to keep fighting and suffering a lot." Reporters asked Merz, who has been an ardent supporter of Ukraine and recently lifted Germany's existing strike bans, if he agrees with Trump that "fighting it out" was the way to proceed. "I think we both agree on this war and how terrible this war is. And we are both looking for ways to stop it very soon," Merz said. "I told the president before we came in that he is the key person in the world who can really do that now by putting pressure on Russia, and we will have this debate later on again, how we can proceed jointly between the Europeans and the Americans. "I think we are all… having the duty to do something on that now, to stop it after three and a half years, which is really terrible," he added, making it clear without directly contradicting the president that he did not agree with Trump. "We are on the side of Ukraine, and we are trying to get them stronger and stronger just to make Putin stop this war. This is our approach," Merz added.