Staff Reports
Judge James Boasberg has once again thrown a wrench into Trump’s plans, this time blocking efforts to deport members of a Venezuelan gang operating in the U.S. But this isn’t Boasberg’s first dance with controversy; his past affiliations with the left and questionable decisions during the Trump-Russia investigation leave many wondering why he’s still calling the shots in such critical cases.
Nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Barack Obama in 2011, Boasberg has carved out a reputation that fits snugly in the realm of the “Radical Left.” Once at the helm of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, he made a series of questionable choices that conveniently aligned with the FBI’s narrative during the Russiagate saga. For conservatives watching this legal drama unfold, it’s an unsettling reminder of how politically motivated judicial decisions can sow chaos while keeping dangerous individuals in the country.
During his recent ruling, Boasberg took it upon himself to hit the brakes on Trump’s application of the Alien Enemies Act, intended for expelling members of the criminal gang Tren de Aragua. Trump, ever the straightforward communicator, pointed out the gang’s threat, which includes thousands of members reportedly engaging in violent and hostile actions against the U.S. But Boasberg’s decision to block these deportations not only appeases the leftist agenda but raises eyebrows about the safety and integrity of American communities—the very communities that should not have to contend with illegal criminal activity.
So if he had been held accountable for this, he would not be blocking anything right now?
Judge blocking Trump deportations played key role in Trump-Russia FISA saga | Just The News https://t.co/ZvcfGx6T5k— Lara Logan (@laralogan) March 20, 2025
Responding to the judge’s overreach, Trump did not hold back, calling Boasberg a “Radical Left Lunatic” and emphasizing that Americans should not be tasked with supporting “vicious, violent, and demented criminals.” The irony is palpable since Boasberg’s judicial history suggests a tendency to shield criminal figures while remaining cozy with the political apparatus that seems keen on targeting Trump rather than the actual transgressors. It’s as if he were playing a high-stakes game of judicial chess, where the only pieces in play are the ones that threaten the safety of ordinary Americans.
While it should be concerning for all that this judge enjoys a seat of power, history reveals his penchant for protecting the bureaucracy even when alarm bells sounded over its integrity. Under his watch, the FBI was allowed to continue its FISA abuses and sweeping powers, right after being exposed for significant flaws in its investigative process. Boasberg seemed more interested in praising the bureaucracy than ensuring accountability for those who had misused their authority. At the end of the day, many believe that Boasberg maneuvers within a system eager to undermine the very fabric of the Constitution, all while wrapping himself in the mantle of judicial neutrality.
In light of all this, Boasberg’s connections—both familial and professional—raise legitimate questions about his impartiality. With a spouse who has financially supported Democratic candidates and a daughter active in organizations working against the very principle of law and order, it’s no surprise that conservatives are seeing red. A judge with ties like Boasberg’s in an era of hyper-partisan politics is a recipe for disaster, especially when the stakes involve national security and public safety. The courtroom isn’t just a place for legal proceedings; it has become a battlefield for ideological warfare, where justice sometimes seems a mere footnote to political allegiance.
