These are the judges going toe to toe against Trump’s agenda
President Donald Trump has signed more than 80 executive orders since returning to the White House in January — prompting more than 100 lawsuits against his administration. While Democratic lawmakers have accused the Trump administration of launching a “constitutional crisis” within the U.S. as a result of these orders, the White House has claimed that “low-level” judges have issued unconstitutional injunctions barring Trump from implementing his agenda and that it will appeal adverse rulings. “You cannot have a low-level district court judge filing an injunction to usurp the executive authority of the President of the United States,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Friday. “That is completely absurd. … It’s very clear that there are judicial activists throughout our judicial branch who are trying to block this president’s executive authority.” Here are some of the judges, appointed under the Obama and Biden administrations, who’ve pushed back against Trump’s orders: Boasberg has served as the chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia since March 2023, and was first appointed as a judge to the District Court in March 2011 under the Obama administration. Boasberg issued several key rulings on various cases during Trump’s first administration. For example, he blocked Arkansas, Kentucky and New Hampshire from implementing work requirement waivers for Medicaid recipients, after the Trump administration’s Department of Health and Human Services unveiled a policy permitting states to enforce the waivers for Medicaid recipients. Ultimately, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a ruling in February 2020 upholding Boasberg’s previous decision in the Kentucky and Arkansas case. In the ruling, the appeals court said that former Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar “failed to analyze whether the demonstrations would promote the primary objective of Medicaid — to furnish medical assistance.” The Supreme Court then dismissed all pending cases related to the Medicaid work requirements in April 2022. WHITE HOUSE BLASTS JUDGE FOR ATTEMPTING TO HALT DEPORTATION FLIGHTS TO EL SALVADOR: ‘NO LAWFUL BASIS’ On Saturday, Boasberg issued an order halting the Trump administration from deporting migrants under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which permits deportation of natives and citizens of an enemy nation without a hearing. However, the flight continued to drop off the migrants in El Salvador, and Leavitt said Sunday the order had “no lawful basis” since Boasberg issued it after the flight’s departure from U.S. airspace. Boasberg graduated from Yale College in 1985 and Yale Law School in 1990. He also served a seven-year term from 2014 to 2021 on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which handles surveillance requests for foreign intelligence gathering. Sorokin, an Obama appointee, joined the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in 2014, after previously serving as magistrate judge on the same court. Sorokin spearheaded a delayed-sentencing program in Massachusetts known as the Repair, Invest, Succeed, Emerge, or RISE, program. The program offers some criminal offenders a yearlong delay in sentencing for some criminal offenders who qualify for pretrial release as they undergo an intensive supervision program. “I’m thrilled with how the restorative justice part of RISE has gone, so we’re expanding,” Sorokin said at an event at Columbia Law School in 2020. “I think it’s lawful. I think it’s correct. I think it’s what we ought to be doing.” Sorokin said his motivation to launch the RISE program stemmed from a conversation he had with a man convicted of bank robbery who explained he wanted to apologize to the bank teller and to his sisters for committing the crime. Sorokin blocked the Trump administration from implementing an executive order to ban birthright citizenship in February — joining other judges from Maryland and Washington state in issuing nationwide injunctions against the ban. The Trump administration requested the Supreme Court step in Friday and allow it to execute the order, and the Supreme Court requested responses from challengers by April 4. Sorokin attended Columbia Law School and has worked as a professor for Boston University School of Law. Ali, a Biden appointee, is one of the newest judges to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, joining the court in December 2024. Ali also helped launch the MacArthur Justice Center’s Washington, D.C., branch in 2017, a nonprofit law firm that specializes in criminal justice reform and civil rights issues. Ali, who eventually led the firm as the executive director, argued and won two cases before the Supreme Court on behalf of the MacArthur Justice Center. Ali’s ties to the firm came under scrutiny during his confirmation hearing in February 2024 before the Senate, where lawmakers asked him about remarks his MacArthur Justice Center colleague, Cliff Johnson, made in 2020 asserting that defunding the police paves the way for a “movement toward making police departments obsolete.” WHO IS JUDGE AMIR ALI? THE BIDEN-APPOINTED FEDERAL JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S USAID BATTLE However, Ali told lawmakers that he didn’t espouse those views, nor did the MacArthur Justice Center. “Let me be very clear about this,” Ali said. “I have never advocated for taking away police funding. I would not take that position, and the MacArthur Justice Center has not taken that position.” On March 11, Ali issued a ruling that determined the Trump administration likely exceeded its constitutional authority when it sought to halt payments the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) owed to contractors amounting to $2 billion in funding Congress had approved. Ali has also taught classes on civil, criminal and appellate litigation at schools, including Harvard Law School and the Georgetown University Law Center. Howell, an Obama appointee, joined the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 2010. She previously served as staff and as general counsel of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary from 1993 to 2003. Howell ruled against the Trump administration March 6, and wrote in her ruling that Trump did not have the authority to fire members of
Trump accuses Big Media of ‘illegal’ reporting, virtually abolishes Voice of America
President Trump has spent the last decade railing against fake news, a phrase that’s now deeply embedded in our culture. He has accused the media of being relentlessly biased against him – which is largely true – and called out journalists by name. He has sued such outlets as ABC News (which paid him $16 million), CBS and the Des Moines Register. He has charged that Politico received payments for negatively covering him – it turned out these were routine subscriptions, and for the New York Times as well – and then canceled many of the subscriptions. TRUMP ORDERS THE DISMANTLING OF GOVERNMENT-FUNDED, ‘PROPAGANDA’-PEDDLING MEDIA OUTLET But in a controversial speech at the Justice Department, Trump went further than ever before. He said the Times, the Washington Post and the major networks were engaged in “illegal” reporting. The president did not specify what was illegal about it. But perhaps there’s a short distance between Trump’s accusation and a future prosecution? The DOJ speech drew heavy coverage. The Times said he “veered from his prepared remarks to lash out at lawyers and former prosecutors by name in a venue dedicated to the impartial administration of justice. He also accused the department’s previous leadership of trying to destroy him and declared former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. the head of a ‘crime’ family.” The Post quoted Trump as saying his enemies had “launched one hoax and disinformation operation after another, broke the law on a colossal scale, persecuted my family, staff and supporters, raided my home, Mar-a-Lago, and did everything within their power to prevent me from becoming the President of the United States.” The paper added: “It is rare for a president to visit the Justice Department — which has kept safeguards between the White House and the law enforcement agency in the post-Watergate era to ensure that politics don’t interfere with law enforcement investigations.” But here’s the fascinating part. The Times and the Post made no mention of Trump’s “illegal” reporting charge. Didn’t give it as much as a paragraph. Couldn’t squeeze it in (I say in jest, since space is unlimited in the digital age). I see two possible explanations for this. One is that they are so offended by the president’s accusation, which they view as false, that they don’t want to give it any oxygen and share it with readers. In other words, when the president is shooting arrows at you, it’s best to deflect them. The other is that they fear that there might be a prosecution down the road – given Trump’s history of civil lawsuits – and don’t want to cross him on this issue. In short, they are intimidated by the president. But here’s the thing: If two of the nation’s preeminent newspapers aren’t going to defend themselves on the charge of illegality, who is? How can they expect any backing when they won’t stand up for themselves, by censoring Trump’s remarks? Meanwhile, over the weekend, the president all but abolished the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe with an executive order aimed at its parent agency – whose special adviser is former Arizona candidate Kari Lake. Trump ordered 1,300 journalists, executives and other staffers placed on indefinite leave. His argument is that they’re part of the radical left. He’s a longtime critic of VOA, having once called it the “voice of the Soviet Union.” SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE’S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF ON THE DAY’S HOTTEST STORIES Carla Babb, the VOA’s Pentagon correspondent, posted this: “A silencing of VOA will be celebrated by communists, autocrats and ayatollahs whose lies we shed light on.” The VOA was launched during World War II and credited with successfully countering enemy propaganda for decades. But there’s a legitimate debate to been had about who the “enemy” is these days, given Trump’s friendly relationship with Vladimir Putin. What’s more, people aren’t huddled around their radios as they were in 1942. But those who were laid off indefinitely consider themselves independent journalists – and suddenly find themselves out of a job.
US equal opportunity commission demands 20 law firms disclose DEI employment practices
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is requesting data from 20 law firms about employment practices to increase diversity, equity and inclusion, which the federal agency warns may be illegal. The commission’s acting chair, Andrea Lucas, sent letters to the firms seeking detailed information on DEI programs that may be in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin. Some of the companies have made legal challenges to President Donald Trump’s policies targeting DEI or have connections to his political opponents. Perkins Coie; Hogan Lovells; Ropes & Gray; and WilmerHale are among the firms currently representing plaintiffs in lawsuits against the Trump administration. Lucas said some of the firms had made public statements expressing their commitment to diversity in their workforces. At least two of the firms had numerical goals for recruiting lawyers based on their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender identity. TRUMP EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PUTS EMPLOYERS ‘ON NOTICE’ TO STOP ‘ANTI-AMERICAN BIAS’ She expressed concern that the firms’ employment practices “may entail unlawful disparate treatment in terms, conditions, and privileges of employment, or unlawful limiting, segregating, and classifying” based on race, sex and other protected characteristics. “The EEOC is prepared to root out discrimination anywhere it may rear its head, including in our nation’s elite law firms,” Lucas said in a statement. “No one is above the law—and certainly not the private bar.” The letters requested information about the internships, scholarships and fellowships the firms offer to law students, as well as the firms’ hiring and compensation practices. Lucas also asked for the name, sex and race of every lawyer who has worked at or applied for a job at the firms since 2019 and if each of them participated in diversity programs. Some of the information was asked to be included in a “searchable Excel spreadsheet.” ‘UNLAWFUL DEI-MOTIVATED’ WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION TO BE ROOTED OUT BY TRUMP’S NEW ACTING EEOC CHAIR The EEOC can investigate companies’ employment practices and file lawsuits over allegations of discrimination, but only after a worker or one of the agency’s five commissioners brings a formal complaint. The agency gave no indication that Lucas had filed complaints against any of the firms. Trump has sought to eliminate DEI programs across the country, including in the federal government, higher education and the private sector. The president has also taken action against high-profile law firms over their DEI practices. Trump issued executive orders this month targeting Perkins Coie as well as Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison over the two firms’ alleged discriminatory internal diversity policies and previous work for his political opponents. The orders revoked security clearances for lawyers at the firms and restricted their government access and federal contracting work. The order targeting Perkins Coie also directed Lucas to “review the practices of representative large, influential, or industry-leading law firms” even though the commission was designed to operate independently of the White House. Perkins Coie sued on allegations that the order violated its rights under the U.S. Constitution. A judge temporarily blocked parts of the order last week. Some companies have previously adopted policies to encourage diversity from their outside law firms. Lucas, in the letters, asked law firms to identify clients since 2019 that have had “diversity requirements” or stated preferences for employee staffing. She also asked for the firms’ actions in response to the client requirements, including producing related documents. Reuters contributed to this report.
Trump says he’ll speak with Putin in call to push for truce in Ukraine
President Donald Trump said he will speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday about the final points of a deal to end the war in Ukraine. In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said many “elements” of the Final Agreement” have been agreed to “but much remains.” “Thousands of young soldiers, and others, are being killed. Each week brings 2,500 soldier deaths, from both sides, and it must end NOW,” Trump wrote. “I look very much forward to the call with President Putin.” TRUMP, PUTIN CALL EXPECTED THIS WEEK, AS ADMIN EDGES CLOSER TO RUSSIA-UKRAINE CEASEFIRE DEAL: WITKOFF Some points of discussion could involed territorial concessions by Kyiv and control of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. The Trump administration has been working on a deal to end the three-year war. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko reportedly said that the Kremlin wants an “ironclad” guarantee that Ukraine will be prohibited from joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Last week, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that “we have never been closer to peace,” as the U.S. waits for Russia’s answer on a 30-day ceasefire agreement. Ukraine accepted the deal earlier in the week after a meeting with U.S. officials in Saudi Arabia, on the condition that Moscow commits to the plan. PUTIN IN NO RUSH TO FOLLOW ‘TRUMP TIME’ CEASEFIRE PROPOSAL Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has called for tougher sanctions on Russia and accused Putin of trying to drag out the peace talks to prolong the war. “It’s clear to everyone in the world—even to those who refused to acknowledge the truth for the past three years—that it is Putin who continues to drag out this war,” the Ukrainian leader wrote Monday on X. “For a week now, Putin has been unable to squeeze out ‘yes’ to the ceasefire proposal. He’s saying whatever he wants, but not what the whole world wants to hear.” He called for world leaders to pressure Moscow into ending the conflict. “The unconditional ceasefire proposal is essentially about saving lives, allowing diplomats to work on ensuring security and a lasting peace—the proposal that Russia is ignoring,” he said. “Pressure is needed to finally make Moscow accept that their war must be brought to an end.”
Political geography: quarrelling NYC neighbors a country mile apart on Trump-era policy
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., reside just a few blocks from one another as you traverse from Prospect Heights to Park Slope in Brooklyn. But political observers suspect there’s practically a bridge of political distance spanning between the two Brooklyn Democrats now. Schumer decided to help Republicans break a filibuster and forestall a government shutdown last week. Schumer’s decision triggered howls of derision from House Democrats who were practically unified in their opposition to the GOP spending package. Schumer and nine other Democrats voted to break the filibuster. That sent many Democrats into a fit of apoplexy. Distance and geography helps us understand this perceived chasm between Schumer and Jeffries. It’s a solid 40 miles from the Lansdowne Resort in Leesburg, Va., to the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. After the House voted to approve the emergency spending bill last Tuesday, Democrats high-tailed it to Leesburg for their annual issues retreat. Jeffries and other Democratic leaders held a press conference on the first day. Other Democrats spoke at nine news conference on the succeeding days. TOP HOUSE DEMOCRAT LEAVES SCHUMER IN THE COLD AMID LEFT’S DISARRAY ON SHUTDOWN DRAMA But back on Capitol Hill last Friday, Jeffries and other Democratic leaders would speed back from Leesburg for a news conference just before the vote to break a filibuster on the spending measure. Schumer asserted that sidestepping a government shutdown was the lesser of two evils. He argued that a shutdown would further empower President Trump and Elon Musk to slash the federal workforce and shutter departments. Jeffries wasn’t buying it. And he needed to signal to House Democrats about what side he was on. “House Democrats remain strongly opposed to the partisan Republican spending bill that will hurt families, hurt veterans, hurt seniors, and hurt the American people,” said Jeffries. “It is a false choice that Donald Trump, Elon Musk and House Republicans have been presenting.” Schumer and Jeffries spoke after the top Democrat in the Senate announced he would reluctantly vote to break a filibuster – and bring several Democratic colleagues along with him. Republicans control the Senate. But they only have 53 votes. Sixty votes are necessary to crush a filibuster. That’s where Democrats come in. And Schumer relented. SCHUMER UNDER FIRE FROM DEMOCRATS FOR SUPPORTING REPUBLICAN SPENDING BILL, FUELING LEADERSHIP CONCERNS: REPORT “Is it time for new leadership in the Senate,” asked Chase Williams of Fox Business to Jeffries at the hastily arranged House Democratic leadership news conference on Capitol Hill. “Next question,” replied Jeffries. Another reporter tried a different approach. “Have you lost confidence in him, the fact that you guys see this so differently,” asked the reporter. “Next question,” echoed Jeffries. What’s unsaid is often what speaks the loudest in politics. That’s what was so striking about Jeffries’ identical responses when asked about his fellow Brooklynite. Again, Jeffries seethed about the bill and how Schumer caved to the Republicans. Otherwise, he and other Democratic leaders wouldn’t have hustled back to Capitol Hill from suburban Virginia to blast the legislation. DEMOCRATS BLAST SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER FOR BACKING GOP SPENDING BILL Yours truly wanted to follow up after the press conference, given Jeffries’ direct reticence about Schumer. “Why were you afraid to say anything about Schumer when you were asked?” I questioned Jeffries as he walked out of the House Radio/TV Gallery studio. Jeffries demeanor is usually cooler than a swirled Mister Softee cone under a shade tree in Prospect Park in August. But after my question, Jeffries stopped in his tracks and flashed a hint of anger. “Don’t characterize! No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No,” admonished Jeffries, “But my question was, why are you afraid to say anything?” I interjected. “Do not characterize my remarks. I’m not afraid about anything. Anything!” said Jeffries. “You went to another question,” I noted. “I said I was very clear that we look forward to working with every single one of our Senate Democratic colleagues. Every single one of them who pushed back against the Trump administration. Every single one of them. It’s very clear,” said Jeffries. MSNBC PANEL GRILLS SCHUMER FOR SUPPORTING GOP SPENDING BILL So Jeffries had the fine line to walk. Incinerate the interim spending bill. Show rank-and-file Democrats how unhappy he was with what the Senate was doing. Yet be careful about what he says about Schumer. But as we said, what’s unsaid often speaks the loudest. Jeffries demonstrated his displeasure. But frankly, Jeffries didn’t have to say much. Just returning to the Capitol said everything. And doing so right after getting an earful from House Democrats about Schumer’s maneuver may have scored Jeffries some points. So, back to the questions at the House Democratic leadership press conference… “Is it time for new leadership in the Senate?” And, has Jeffries “lost confidence” in Schumer? The second interrogative is not as important. Democrats nationally – if not Senate Democrats – will determine what they want to do with Schumer. If anything. Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., opposed the interim spending bill. Warner was torn because he represents so many federal workers in northern Virginia. DEMOCRATS LASH OUT AT SCHUMER FOR ‘BETRAYAL’ OF SIDING WITH TRUMP “Are you going to issue a statement on Schumer’s leadership?” asked one reporter of Warner after the vote to fund the government. “Is Leader Schumer the right leader in this moment,” asked another. “I have faith in Chuck Schumer,” replied Warner. Scribes asked similar questions of Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., following the vote. “We also need to figure out how to use our leverage,” said Heinrich. In other words, some Democrats believed the interim spending bill was an inflection point. They might not be able to stop President Trump and Congressional Republicans from approving the “big, beautiful bill” to slash spending and cut taxes. But they could have shuttered the government by filibustering the spending plan because it failed to reflect any major Democratic priorities. They needed to stand up.
Trump revokes Secret Service protection for adult Biden children Hunter and Ashley
President Donald Trump on Monday announced that former President Joe Biden’s adult children will no longer receive U.S. Secret Service protection. In a Truth Social post, Trump remarked that Hunter Biden has received Secret Service protection for an “extended period of time.” “There are as many as 18 people on this Detail, which is ridiculous!” Trump wrote. “Please be advised that, effective immediately, Hunter Biden will no longer receive Secret Service protection.” WHO IS SEAN CURRAN? HEAD OF TRUMP’S PERSONAL DETAIL TO BE NOMINATED FOR SECRET SERVICE DIRECTOR Ashley Biden, Hunter’s sister, will have her Secret Service protection revoked as well. Trump noted that 13 agents were assigned to her security detail. “We are aware of the President’s decision to terminate protection for Hunter and Ashley Biden,” the Secret Service told Fox News Digital. “The Secret Service will comply and is actively working with the protective details and the White House to ensure compliance as soon as possible.” Fox News Digital has reached out to Hunter Biden’s lawyers. Former presidents and their spouses receive life-long Secret Service protection under federal law, but the protection afforded to their immediate families over the age of 16 ends when they leave office, though both Trump and Biden extended the details for their children for six months before leaving office, the Associated Press reported. Former President Biden allowed Baron Trump to keep his Secret Service protection after his 16th birthday. SECRET SERVICE STRUGGLE TO PROTECT PRESIDENTS WON’T SEE ‘IMMEDIATE’ END EVEN WITH MORE MANPOWER: RETIRED AGENT In his post, Trump said Biden was vacationing in South Africa, which has come under intense pressure from the administration over its land exploration law that allows the government to make land seizures without compensation and its support for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas and Iran, Trump said the seizures discriminate against White land owners. “Because of this, South Africa has been taken off our list of Countries receiving Economic and Financial Assistance,” Trump wrote. Last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said South Africa’s ambassador to the United States “is no longer welcome” in the country. In a Friday webinar, Ebrahim Rasool talked of the Trump administration’s crackdowns on diversity and equity programs and immigration. “The supremacist assault on incumbency, we see it in the domestic politics of the U.S.A., the MAGA movement, the Make America Great Again movement, as a response not simply to a supremacist instinct, but to very clear data that shows great demographic shifts in the U.S.A. in which the voting electorate in the U.S.A. is projected to become 48% white,” the South African ambassador said. Rubio accused Ebrahim Rasool of being a “race-baiting politician” who hates Trump. In a post on X, Rubio declared the South African diplomat “persona non grata.”
Trump nominates Republic Airways CEO Bryan Bedford to lead the FAA, appoints new military academy boards
President Donald Trump tapped airline executive Bryan Bedford to lead the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on Monday. Bedford has been the CEO of Indiana-based regional airline Republic Airways since 2007. In a Truth Social post on Monday, Trump wrote that he was “pleased” to announce Bedford’s nomination as the FAA’s administrator. “As the former President and CEO of Republic Airways, Mesaba Airlines, and Business Express Airlines, Brian brings over three decades of experience in Aviation and Executive Leadership to this critical position,” Trump’s post read. Bedford will need to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate before he begins work at the FAA. The president also referenced Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, noting that Bedford will work with him. PLANE CRASHES IN RETIREMENT COMMUNITY’S PARKING LOT IN PENNSYLVANIA: OFFICIALS “Bryan will work with our GREAT Secretary of Transportation, Sean Duffy, to strongly reform the Agency, safeguard our exports, and ensure the safety of nearly one billion annual passenger movements,” Trump’s post noted. “Congratulations Bryan!” The recent announcement comes as the Trump administration continues its overhaul of the FAA, which involved laying off hundreds of workers in February. The agency attracted scrutiny after the Jan. 29 Potomac River midair collision at Reagan National Airport near D.C., which killed 67 people. “We must have only the highest standards for those who work in our aviation system,” Trump said at the time. “Only the highest aptitude — you have to be the highest intellect — and psychologically superior people, were allowed to qualify for air traffic controllers.” Following Trump’s announcement about Bedford, he also named new appointees to serve on military academy boards. PLANE CAUGHT ON CAMERA CRASHING INTO NEW ENGLAND NEIGHBORHOOD, NARROWLY MISSING HOMES “Our Great United States Air Force Academy will soon have an incredible Board of Visitors, composed of Doug Nikolai, Dan Clark, Senator Tommy Tuberville, Charlie Kirk, and Dina Powell. Congratulations,” Trump wrote. “Completing my list of appointments to the United States Naval Academy, I am happy to announce that the full Board will consist of Sean Spicer, Walt Nauta, Congressman ‘Doc Ronnie’ Jackson, Congressman Derek Van Order, Senator Tim Sheehy, and Earl Ehrhart,” the president added. “Congratulations to you all!” Trump also named the new members of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point’s Board of Visitors. “Major General David Bellavia, Lieutenant General Dan Walrath, General Michael Flynn, Congressman Wesley Hunt, Maureen Bannon, and Meghan Mobbs are hereby appointed to the Board,” Trump said. “They will make our Country proud. Congratulations to all!” In another Monday post, Trump declared that April 2 would be observed as Liberation Day in America, “because we will start taking back some of the vast wealth that has been taken from us due to the many weak, incompetent, and perhaps even dishonest politicians who have represented us in the past!”
US judge orders Trump lawyers to testify under oath about deportation flights
A federal judge on Monday denied the Trump administration’s request to call off a court hearing involving President Donald Trump’s use of a wartime law to deport hundreds of Venezuelan nationals, and whether the White House knowingly violated the court order – an extraordinary effort that came just moments before administration officials were due to testify under oath. The Justice Department’s filing came shortly after U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered lawyers to court Monday for a “fact-finding hearing” involving Trump’s use of the 1798 wartime-era Alien Enemies Act, and whether the Trump administration knowingly violated his earlier court order blocking the Trump administration from invoking the law to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals and alleged members of violent gang Tren de Aragua, for 14 days. The law has only been used three times in U.S. history, most recently during World War II. During Monday’s hearing, which lasted about 45 minutes, Judge Boasberg at times appeared frustrated as he pressed government lawyers for more details as to why his Saturday order—which called for the administration to immediately return all planes with expelled migrants, including the Venezuelan nationals and alleged Tren de Aragua gang members—were not brought back to the U.S. “My orders don’t seem to carry much weight,” Jude Boasberg said near the end of the hearing. Both parties are due back in court Friday for a hearing over the Trump administration’s request to vacate the case. WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S DEPORTATION EFFORTS? During the hearing, the Trump administration repeatedly declined to provide information to Judge Boasberg about how many flights carrying migrants took off on Saturday, citing national security protections. “Those are operational issues, and I am not at liberty to provide information,” a lawyer for the Trump administration told the court. Judge Boasberg, in response, ordered the Justice Department to provide the court with more information in writing by Tuesday at noon. In granting the emergency order Saturday Boasberg sided with the plaintiffs – Democracy Forward and the ACLU – who had argued that the deportations would likely pose imminent and “irreparable” harm to the migrants under the time proposed. TRUMP POLICY ON BORDER JUMPERS EMPOWERS USE OF ‘MAXIMUM CONSEQUENCES,’ BORDER AGENT TELLS FOX Judge Boasberg also ordered the Trump administration Saturday to immediately halt any planned deportations, and to notify their clients that “any plane containing these folks that is going to take off or is in the air needs to be returned to the United States,” he said. But the decision apparently came too late to stop a plane filled with more than 200 migrants who were deported to El Salvador. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News in an interview that a plane carrying hundreds of migrants, including more than 130 persons removed under the Alien Enemies Act, had already “left U.S. airspace” by the time the order was handed down. She also suggested the order itself was not “lawful” and noted the Trump administration’s intent to appeal. In response, the ACLU asked the court to order the government to submit declarations, under oath, that the planes had indeed taken off after the court’s order. “Whether or not the planes had cleared U.S. territory, the U.S. retained custody at least until the planes landed and the individuals were turned over to foreign governments,” the ACLU said in their filing. Judge Boasberg, an Obama appointee, at times appeared slightly incredulous that the Trump administration chose to move forward with the deportation of hundreds of migrants to El Salvador, pressing lawyers for the Justice Department over whether they believed there were better options than to comply with the decision he handed down Saturday. “Isn’t then the better course, to return the planes to the United States and figure out what to do, than to say, ‘We don’t care, we’ll do what we want?’” he asked.
Trump announces he will release 80,000 JFK assassination files on Tuesday, going to be ‘very interesting’
President Donald Trump on Monday announced that he would release around 80,000 unredacted files on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on Tuesday. Trump made the announcement while touring the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. “While we’re here, I thought it would be appropriate, we are, tomorrow, announcing and giving all of the Kennedy files. So, people have been waiting for decades for this, and I’ve instructed my people… lots of different people, [director of national intelligence] Tulsi Gabbard, that they must be released tomorrow,” he said. “You got a lot of reading. I don’t believe we’re going to redact anything. I said, ‘just don’t redact, you can’t redact,’” the president said. DEADLINE LOOMS FOR RELEASE OF JFK ASSASSINATION FILES He noted that the files would be “very interesting.” In January, Trump signed an executive order directing the release of federal government documents related to the assassinations of Kennedy, former Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and civil rights icon Martin Luther King Jr. TRUMP SIGNS ORDER TO DECLASSIFY FILES ON JFK, RFK AND MLK ASSASSINATIONS Trump had promised to release the previously classified documents during his 2024 campaign after decades of speculation and conspiracy theories about the killings. “Everything will be revealed,” Trump told reporters at the time. During his first term in office, Trump promised to release all the files related to John F. Kennedy, but an undisclosed amount of material remains under wraps more than six decades after Kennedy was killed Nov. 22, 1963, in Dallas. The primary suspect, Lee Harvey Oswald, was killed two days later by Jack Ruby. After appeals from the CIA and FBI, Trump blocked the release of hundreds of records. Trump said at the time the potential harm to U.S. national security, law enforcement or foreign affairs is “of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in immediate disclosure.” The JFK assassination has remained a point of interest among the public for decades amid conspiracy theories about the involvement of a second shooter.
Number of injunctions halting Trump policies trounces predecessors by double
Nationwide injunctions ordered against the first Trump administration account for more than half of the total injunctions ordered against the federal government since 1963, data show. Nationwide injunctions are court orders that prevent the federal government from implementing a policy or law that has a cascading effect impacting the entire country, not just the parties involved in the court case. Trump’s first administration faced 64 injunctions out of the total 127 nationwide injunctions issued since 1963. There were 32 injunctions issued against the Bush, Obama and Biden administrations collectively since 2001, meaning the first Trump administration was on the receiving end of double the amount of nationwide injunctions than his two predecessors and successor combined, according to the April 2024 edition of the Harvard Law Review. The Harvard Law Review found there were six injunctions issued against the Bush administration, 12 against the Obama administration and 14 against the Biden administration. TRUMP ASKS SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW BAN ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP Trump’s return to the Oval Office in January has brought with it more than 120 lawsuits from activists, government employees and others targeting his executive orders and actions. The lawsuits have resulted in nationwide injunctions in some cases, including 15 in February alone, according to Trump’s acting solicitor general, Sarah Harris. Trump filed an emergency appeal Thursday asking the Supreme Court to narrow three injunctions that were issued to halt Trump’s nullification of birthright citizenship. The emergency appeal requests the injunction only cover individuals directly impacted by the relevant courts. INJUNCTION LIFTED ON TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDERS SLASHING FEDERAL DEI SUPPORT Harris argued in the emergency appeal that nationwide injunctions have hit “epidemic proportions” under the second Trump administration, noting that the federal government faced 14 universal injunctions in the first three years of the Biden administration compared to 15 leveled against the Trump admin in one month alone. “Years of experience have shown that the Executive Branch cannot properly perform its functions if any judge anywhere can enjoin every presidential action everywhere,” Harris wrote. Officials in the first Trump administration also railed against the flow of injunctions ordered against the 45th president’s policies and laws, including the former chiefs of the Department of Justice. “Courts issued an average of only 1.5 nationwide injunctions per year against the Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush administrations, and 2.5 per year against the Obama administration,” former Assistant Attorney General Beth Williams said in February 2019. “In President Trump’s first year in office, however, judges issued a whopping 20 nationwide injunctions – an eightfold increase. This matches the entire eight-year total of such injunctions issued against President Obama during his two terms. We are now at 30, matching the total number of injunctions issued against the first 42 presidents combined.” FEDERAL JUDGE TEMPORARILY STOPS TRUMP ADMIN FROM FIRING 11 INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS ASSIGNED TO DEI PROGRAMS Former Trump administration Attorney General Bill Barr added in remarks later in 2019 that there were “only 27 nationwide injunctions in all of the 20th century” compared to 37, at the time, against the first Trump administration. “Since President Trump took office, federal district courts have issued 37 nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch. That’s more than one a month. By comparison, during President Obama’s first two years, district courts issued two nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch, both of which were vacated by the Ninth Circuit. And according to the Department’s best estimates, courts issued only 27 nationwide injunctions in all of the 20th century,” the former AG said in May 2019. TRUMP SCORES BIG LEGAL WIN AGAINST PULITZER PRIZE BOARD MEMBERS AS LAWSUIT MOVES TO DISCOVERY Harvard Law Review found that the judges who issued the injunctions against the first Trump administration were overwhelmingly ordered by judges who were appointed by a Democrat. Democratic-appointed judges ordered 92.2% of the injunctions against the Trump administration, meaning just five of the 64 injunctions were ordered by Republican-appointed judges. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Republican-appointed judges ordered all 14 of the nationwide injunctions against the federal government under the Biden administration. Injunctions under the Bush and Obama eras were much more bipartisan, with 50% of the injunctions in the Bush era issued by Democratic-appointed judges, and Republican-appointed judges ordering 58.3% of the 12 injunctions in the Obama era. Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report.