White House Accuses Judges of Partisan Activism as Legal Battles Mount Against Trump Administration
The White House is escalating its attacks on the judicial branch, accusing judges of partisan activism and undermining President Donald Trump’s agenda following a series of court rulings that have blocked key executive orders. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has emerged as a vocal critic, asserting that some judges are acting as "partisan activists from the bench."
The most recent flashpoint involves Judge James Boasberg of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, who issued an order halting the Trump administration’s deportation of migrants allegedly linked to the Tren de Aragua gang under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. This controversial law allows for the deportation of citizens of enemy nations without a hearing.
Despite the judge’s order, flights carrying the migrants continued to El Salvador. Leavitt argued that Boasberg’s order had "no lawful basis" because it was issued after the flights had already departed U.S. airspace.
This incident has triggered a fierce response from both the White House and congressional allies of the President. Trump himself took to social media to call for Boasberg’s impeachment, a move that prompted a rare rebuke from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
Roberts defended the independence of the judiciary, stating that "it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision" for more than two centuries.
Leavitt doubled down on the White House’s criticism in response to Roberts’ statement, asserting that the Supreme Court needs to "rein in" judges who are behaving as "partisan activists" and "undermining" the judicial branch. She also maintained that Trump respects Roberts, despite the President’s strong criticism of the judge and the judicial system more broadly.
Echoing the President’s sentiments, Representative Brandon Gill, a Republican from Texas, unveiled an impeachment resolution against Boasberg, claiming that the judge was "guilty of high crimes."
Leavitt has explicitly accused the "far left" of engaging in "judge shopping" – strategically seeking out judges who are perceived to be sympathetic to their political views in an attempt to derail the President’s agenda. "It’s incredibly apparent that there is a concerted effort by the far left to judge shop, to pick judges who are clearly acting as partisan activists from the bench in an attempt to derail this President’s agenda," she stated. "We will not allow that to happen."
While no further deportation flights to El Salvador are currently scheduled, Leavitt emphasized that the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign will continue as the litigation in the Boasberg case unfolds. "We don’t have any flights planned specifically, but we will continue with the mass deportations," she affirmed.
She also directly challenged the judge’s authority, stating, "And I would just like to point out that the judge in this case is essentially trying to say that the President doesn’t have the executive authority to deport foreign terrorists…That is an egregious abuse of the bench."
Boasberg has requested further information from the Trump administration regarding the timing of the deportation flights, specifically when they departed U.S. soil, left U.S. airspace, and landed in El Salvador. The administration has been given until Thursday to respond.
The escalating tension between the executive and judicial branches highlights the growing legal challenges facing the Trump administration. Since returning to the White House in January, the President has signed more than 90 executive orders, which have spurred over 125 lawsuits.
The odds of successfully impeaching a judge are slim, as it would require a two-thirds majority (67 votes) in the Senate for conviction. Republicans currently hold a majority of 53 seats in the upper chamber.
Trump has repeatedly criticized the judiciary, claiming the system is rife with "crooked" judges. In an interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, he stated, "However, we have bad judges. We have very bad judges. These are judges that shouldn’t be allowed. I think at a certain point, you have to look at what do you do when you have a rogue judge."
He insisted, however, that he would never defy a court order, stating, "No, you can’t do that."
The conflict with Judge Boasberg is not the only recent legal setback for the Trump administration. U.S. District Court Judge Ana Reyes recently blocked Trump’s executive order barring transgender individuals from serving in the military. Reyes wrote in her 79-page opinion that the ban "is soaked in animus." The injunction, which takes effect on Friday, allows the Trump administration an opportunity to appeal the order.
The White House’s increasingly aggressive rhetoric against the judiciary raises concerns about the erosion of judicial independence and the potential for a constitutional crisis. Critics argue that such attacks undermine the rule of law and could embolden the administration to disregard court orders. The Trump administration, however, contends that it is simply holding judges accountable for what it perceives as partisan activism and overreach. The legal battles and political rhetoric surrounding the judicial branch are likely to intensify as the Trump administration continues to push its agenda.
