Sunday, April 13, 2025

When the leftist judiciary wants to run the government

Judicial Imperialism: The House of Boasberg and the Left’s War on Sovereignty


The Supreme Court’s order on Monday granting the Trump administration’semergency request to lift a lower court stay on deportations of certain Venezuelan nationals was unsigned, swift, and unmistakable in its signal—or signals.

For now, the executive branch retains its sovereign authority to enforce immigration law. And for President Trump, now in his second, non-consecutive term, the ruling marked an early victory in a week that would yield several more.

But if constitutionalists interpret this as a decisive turning point, they misread the terrain. The Left’s lawfare brigades remain dug in—launching salvo after salvo—with their campaign of sabotage unfolding in courtrooms and press releases alike, aimed less at justice than at jurisdictional chaos, narrative warfare, and no matter what, thwarting the duly-elected president of the United States.

Make no mistake: this is a war of attrition—not waged with ballots or legislation, but with briefs and bench rulings. It aims to nullify the last presidential election—and a statute nearly as old as the Constitution itself. Its arsenal: blunt injunctions and the sharpened blades of ideological jurisprudence.

This latest flashpoint emerged from a power grab cloaked in humanitarian concern. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg of Washington, D.C., issued a temporary restraining order halting the deportation of alleged members of Tren de Aragua, Venezuela’s most violent criminal syndicate—now embedded within U.S. borders, a legacy of the Biden-era’s open-border indulgence.

The pretext? A thin, uncorroborated assertion that deportees might suffer mistreatment upon return—despite repeated designations of Tren de Aragua by U.S. and allied authorities as a transnational criminal and terrorist organization. That dubious claim, transformed by judicial alchemy, became a sweeping due process theory—crafted to trigger habeas-like relief without the inconvenience of habeas itself.

Yes, you read that paragraph right: the court was seriously entertaining the claim that confirmed members of a violent, terror-affiliated syndicate faced undue risk if returned to El Salvador—or to Venezuela, the failed narco-state that birthed them.

No comments: