Staff Reports
In yet another episode of judicial overreach, Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for D.C. has found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in contempt over actions related to the Alien Enemies Act—a move that raises eyebrows and sparks laughter among conservatives who see this as just another unwarranted attack on a former president. The case in question revolves around the controversial deportation of alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang, which took place on March 15, 2025. It appears that the relentless litigation against Trump is becoming a sport for liberal judges determined to trip him up at every turn.
Just to clarify the situation—after extensive legal maneuvering and an emergency Saturday hearing, Judge Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt deportations pending a broader review of the case. However, the Supreme Court quickly stepped in, ruling that Boasberg didn’t actually have jurisdiction over this matter, effectively vacating his previous orders. One might think that this would signal the end of the saga, but Boasberg is laughing in the face of logic, carrying on with his inquiry into government compliance. In his lengthy 46-page decision, it seems he’s determined to paint the Trump administration as a group of lawless marauders, even when the higher court has stripped him of his powers.
What’s ironic here is that while his authority was officially dismantled by the Supreme Court, Boasberg insists that the government violated his orders—orders that, as per the Supreme Court’s decision, should no longer hold any water. He leans heavily on the argument that judicial orders must be obeyed—no matter how flawed they might be—until explicitly overturned. This kind of reasoning might make for interesting legal theory, but in practical terms, it sounds more like a desperate attempt to extend his influence. If the Court’s orders are deemed legally defective, how can one reasonably argue that the government is in violation? Boasberg seems determined to keep the charade alive despite the facts.
There He Goes Again: Judge Boasberg Finds Probable Cause to Hold Government in Contempt Over AEA Casehttps://t.co/Kl2dN5Y9a0
— RedState (@RedState) April 16, 2025
This ruling is not just an academic exercise; it comes with a deadline. The Trump administration is now required to “purge their contempt” by asserting custody of those deported in violation of Boasberg’s now-defunct TRO by April 23, 2025. Interestingly, the judge assures that the government won’t have to physically transport anyone back, which raises the question of what the judge actually hopes to achieve here. It appears more like a fishing expedition to find someone to blame than anything else. The notion that the court could offer alternative compliance methods adds a bizarre twist to a situation that should have been put to rest long ago.
As usual, the focus now shifts to the Trump administration, which faces the daunting task of navigating around this legal minefield. Anticipation builds around whether they will appeal Boasberg’s latest antics. Surely, the administration should brace itself for the possibility of more red tape and legal theatrics. It’s almost as if discussing judicial accountability with these radical judges is as effective as herding cats. The onus remains on them to figure out how to play by the rules set by a court that really shouldn’t have jurisdiction in the first place.
In a broader context, this saga exemplifies a larger trend of leftist judicial activism designed to obstruct a president’s agenda. These legal battles serve more to elevate politically charged drama than to ensure justice or uphold the Constitution. Conservatives must remain vigilant against such overreach and remind the American public of the importance of balanced governance. After all, when courts overstepped their bounds, they don’t just mock the system; they mock democracy itself.
