Posted on 08/02/2025 11:52:46 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Rebukes by the Supreme Court and DC appellate court are not stopping Boasberg's quest to punish the Trump administration for alleged contempt. Now he's the target of complaints of misconduct.
Jeb Boasberg is not giving up.
Undeterred by recent smackdowns by the Supreme Court and the D.C. appellate court, Boasberg, the Obama-appointed chief judge of the D.C. district court, is preparing to mete out some sort of punishment against the Trump administration for allegedly defying one of his court orders back in March.
During a hearing last week in the ACLU’s lawsuit related to the Alien Enemies Act, President Trump’s signature deportation policy that ordered the immediate removal of illegal Venezuelans tied to Tren de Aragua, Boasberg expressed frustration that his colleagues on the D.C. appellate court are dragging out a hold on Boasberg’s contempt findings; in April, Boasberg determined “probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt” for allegedly ignoring what he describes as an “oral command” to return planes already out of U.S. airspace carrying AEA subjects on the evening of March 15.
“The Constitution does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders—especially by officials of a coordinate branch who have sworn an oath to uphold it,” Boasberg lectured in his 46-page order. (As I wrote here, it appears Boasberg set the contempt trap from the start.)
But a three-judge panel of the D.C. appellate court quickly halted his contempt proceedings—and Boasberg is not happy. “As everyone knows, the proceedings here have been moving, or to be more accurate, right now not moving (emphasis added) on two separate tracks, the contempt track and the merits track,” an exasperated Boasberg said on July 24. He further noted that “such a lengthy stay has been frustrating to plaintiffs,” referring to the ACLU.
Sensing the appellate court ultimately will overturn his contempt order—a smart prediction given the Supreme Court overturned his underlying order related to the contempt allegations in addition to the silliness of his findings—Boasberg nonetheless warned the Department of Justice he is considering other options. “[Whether] or not I am ultimately permitted to go forward with the contempt proceedings, I will certainly be assessing whether government counsel's conduct and veracity to the Court warrant a referral to state bars or our grievance committee which determines lawyers' fitness to practice in our court,” Boasberg said. (Even more outrageously, Boasberg claimed recent unsubstantiated accusations made by a disgruntled DOJ prosecutor involved in the case and fired earlier this year for insubordination “strengthened” his contempt determination.)
His threat represents yet another escalation in Boasberg’s unhinged effort to retaliate against the president and his administration for criticizing his conduct in the case. On March 18, Trump in a Truth Social post denounced Boasberg as a “radical left lunatic of a judge” who should be impeached; a handful of Republicans have since joined the president’s call to remove him from the bench.
Need a Mirror, Judge Boasberg?
Boasberg knows he’s not going anywhere anytime soon but complaints against him are piling up. Earlier this week, Chad Mizelle, chief of staff to Attorney General Pamela Bondi, filed a misconduct complaint against Boasberg for “making improper public comments about President Donald J. Trump” during a judicial conference just days before Boasberg took up the ACLU case in Washington.
The complaint primarily stems from recent reporting by Margot Cleveland at The Federalist, which had obtained a summary of the conference attended by federal judges and Chief Justice John Roberts in the nation’s capital. The summary indicated Boasberg asked Roberts to address his “colleagues’ concerns that the Administration would disregard rulings of federal courts leading to a constitutional crisis.”
Mizelle also slammed Boasberg over his handling of the ACLU lawsuit. “Throughout the proceedings, Judge Boasberg rushed the government through complex litigation, sometimes giving the Trump Administration less than 48 hours to respond and threatening criminal-contempt proceedings and the appointment of an outside prosecutor against senior Trump Administration officials for failing to comply with an order that had already been vacated.”
The DOJ is asking the chief judge of the D.C. Circuit, fellow Obama appointee Sri Srinivasan, to investigate Boasberg’s “willful misconduct” and reassign the entire case to another judge. (Boasberg also attended Trump’s 2023 arraignment in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s January 6 indictment against the president.)
The same appellate panel also wants to hear from the DOJ and the ACLU in response to allegations Boasberg violated a local court rule by immediately conferring “pseudonym status” to the five illegals in the deportation case. According to an emergency motion filed in April by a Connecticut man who is not a party in the lawsuit, Boasberg did not separately issue an order to seal the names of the plaintiffs—required in the D.C. circuit—he simply approved a motion for the lawsuit to proceed “pseudonymously.”
Boasberg at the time appeared to have known what was required but instead chose to flout the rules: “Given the expedited nature of this matter, it determines that a full Opinion is not practical at this time. Believing that Plaintiffs have made the required showing on the relevant factors, the Court ORDERS that…They shall be permitted to proceed pseudonymously unless and until the assigned judge determines otherwise,” he said in a minute order posted the morning of March 15.
Since then, Boasberg has not issued a full opinion stating his reasons for doing so. (Every ACLU lawsuit on the Alien Enemies Act uses initials rather than names.)
The three judge panel—Trump appointees Greg Katsas and Neomi Rao and Obama appointee Cornelia Pillard—overseeing Boasberg’s contempt order has set a September 5 deadline for both sides to reply to the unsealing motion.
In the meantime, the president’s Alien Enemies Act policy is in limbo awaiting a decision by the Fifth Circuit appellate court as to the lawfulness of the proclamation. (Oral arguments were held on June 30.)
If the appellate court, and the Supreme Court, ultimately decide the courts have no role in the execution of the AEA—which several judges including Boasberg have already acknowledged—then what? How can the president get back months of stonewalling, threats, and overall bad behavior by judges in the matter?
Who will pay the price for such brazen contempt for the president and his policies?
I think Pam Bondi should investigate the activities of judge Boasberg’s daughter.
A number of overturns specified by Congress should remove a Federal Judge as a finding of potential “bad behavior,” then to be subject to re-confirmation by the Senate.
This bastard needs severe consequences.
Trump can pardon any finding of criminal contempt.
CONSIDERING THE ANTICS OF HIS FAMILY MEMBERS—_BOASBERG HAS SERIOUS CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, IMO.
Boasberg is trying to set up grounds for impeachment if the democRATs win in the midterms.
OR .... just send in some marshals and charge him.
Let him lawyer up and go broke.
Works for the dems.
Exactamundo
The process is the punishment.
.
Boasberg should be given a mental health evaluation, his mind has been eaten away by TDS. As has happened with most of the democrat party.
BoASSberg would be perfectly cast in any zombie movie. He wouldn’t have to change a thing.
Great idea. Now explain how we’re going to get that amendment to the Constitution passed.
We don’t have any “contempt of president” laws.
Shouldnt a judge’s family member profiting from the acts of the defendants be a disqualifer?
Boasberg delenda est, aka, “Who will rid us of this troublesome priest?”
A visit to a 10th floor Russian window would do nicely.
Lower federal court are creations of congress just like the EPA, DOJ, Dept of State, etc.
Pause for a moment and imagine the beneficial effect of knowing that a watchful congress stands ready to publicly question judges over their progressive, social justice decisions. Let the nation watch for themselves the lower court justification for blocking President Trump’s Executive Orders.
Do this, and the nation will see what lawyers see: how judges’ feelings and personal sense of secular “morality” affects their rulings. Sure, radical democrat Senators will put on theatrics and shout and bluster at conservative judges just like they do at confirmation hearings, but so what?
Subpeona Boasberg. He is too proud to squirm and recant his crimes. He will, for the ages, shout his moral superiority over the evil Dondald Trump.
Do it.
bttt
Boasberg is trying to set up grounds for impeachment if the democRATs win in the midterms.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.