Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich condemned the wave of federal judges blocking President Donald Trump’s agenda as a ‘judicial coup d’etat’ on Tuesday.

Gingrich made the comments while testifying at a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing focused on ‘judicial overreach’ by U.S. district court judges across the country. The former lawmaker highlighted that the vast majority of judges filing injunctions or restraining orders against Trump’s executive actions have been appointed by Democrats.

‘Mr. Gingrich, I’m told that 92% of the judges who have issued blanket injunctions against the administration have been appointed by Democrats. That at least suggests a partisan tilt to all of this… doesn’t that undermine public confidence in our courts?’ Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., asked at the hearing.

‘If you look at the recent reports from various polling firms, clearly a majority of Americans believe that no single district judge should be able to issue a nationwide injunction,’ Gingrich responded.

‘Look, my judgment is as a historian. This is clearly a judicial coup d’etat. You don’t have this many different judges issue this many different nationwide injunctions – all of them coming from the same ideological and political background – and just assume it’s all random efforts of justice,’ he continued.

‘This is a clear effort to stop the scale of change that President Trump represents,’ he added.

Gingrich went on to argue that it is unacceptable for ‘random’ judges to micromanage the president of the United States.

‘They put both Americans and the nation at risk when they intervene to become basically alternative presidents. You now have potentially 677 alternative presidents, none of whom won an election,’ he said.

The best solution for the wave of injunctions is for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to intervene, Gingrich said. Roberts could ensure that any such rulings from lower federal courts could move straight up to the Supreme Court.

At the center of the court controversy is District Judge James Boasberg, who attempted to block the Trump administration from deporting members of the Tren de Aragua gang to El Salvador. Other judges have placed injunctions on Trump’s efforts to trim down the federal government.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., met privately with Republican judiciary committee members last week for what sources called a ‘brainstorming’ session on how to respond to judges like Boasberg.

Ideas raised by lawmakers included a fast-tracked appeals process, wielding Congress’ spending power over the judiciary, and limiting the ability to ‘judge shop.’

And some conservatives are eager to target specific judges they believe are abusing their power via the impeachment process, but House Republican leaders are wary of that route and believe it to be less effective than other legislative avenues.

Fox News’ Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.

U.S. Department of Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer announced on Monday that her department will return over $1 billion in unused COVID-era funding back to the taxpayer amid the Trump administration’s push for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to slash waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government.

In a press release, the Labor Department said $1.4 billion of unspent COVID funding will be ‘returned to taxpayers through the U.S. Department of Treasury’s General Fund’ and added that ‘action’ is ‘being taken to recover the remaining $2.9 billion.’

 ‘The roughly $4.3 billion was intended for states to use for temporary unemployment insurance during the pandemic,’ the press release states. ‘Instead, several states continued spending millions of dollars despite no longer meeting necessary requirements, which was uncovered in a 2023 audit conducted by the department’s Office of Inspector General.’

The department explained in the press release that the funding originated from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act in March 2020 and that the program was meant to provide expanded unemployment insurance for Americans who were not able to work during the pandemic.

The program was closed in 2021, the department said, but the 2023 audit ‘found four states were allowed to access the funding ‘despite not meeting program requirements,’ totaling over $100 million in spending.’

‘There’s no reason leftover COVID unemployment funds should still be collecting dust,’ DeRemer told Fox News Digital in a statement. ‘I promised to look out for Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars, and we are delivering at the Department of Labor.’

‘Any money still sitting around for pandemic-era unemployment funds is a clear misuse of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars,’ Chavez-DeRemer said in the press release, adding that she is ‘rooting out waste to ensure American Workers always come First.’

Deputy Secretary of Labor Keith Sonderling said in a statement, ‘It’s unacceptable that billions of dollars went unchecked in a program that ended several years ago.

‘In a huge win for the American taxpayer, we’ve clawed back these unused funds and will keep working to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse.’

The announcement comes after DeRemer said in her first memo to the department after taking over last month that she plans to comply with Trump’s executive orders and work with DOGE to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse.

‘Under the leadership of President Trump, our focus remains on promoting job creation, enhancing workforce development, and ensuring safe working conditions, wages, and pensions so that every American has the opportunity to succeed,’ DeRemer said to employees in the memo. ‘I challenge each of you to actively engage with your teams to identify innovative solutions that can help us achieve our goals.’ 

Chavez-DeRemer said that the Labor Department must align with the priorities of the Trump administration and ‘must focus on practicing fiscal responsibility, reducing unnecessary spending, and optimizing our resources to ensure that taxpayer dollars are utilized effectively.’ 

Fox News Digital’s Brooke Singman contributed to this report

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., is forcing a vote on legislation to enable new parents serving in Congress to vote remotely in the weeks surrounding the birth of their child.

Luna introduced the measure as a ‘privileged resolution’ on Tuesday, which gives House leaders two legislative days to take up the measure.

It’s the latest in an increasingly high-stakes fight between Luna and House GOP leaders, who have teamed up with some of Luna’s now-former House Freedom Caucus colleagues to ensure she cannot force a vote on the legislation.

Luna’s initial plan to fast-track her bill despite opposition from House GOP leaders involved a discharge petition, a mechanism for getting a bill onto the House floor if it gets a majority of lawmakers’ signatures – which Luna’s resolution did.

But Republican leaders had language inserted into an unrelated package of bills in the House Rules Committee on Tuesday morning that would have neutered Luna’s effort in a move that rankled GOP supporters of proxy voting.

Even some Republicans on the House Rules Committee, which did ultimately advance the measure, were frustrated by what they saw as a last-minute play by leadership that was done without briefing those GOP lawmakers, Fox News Digital was told.

House GOP leaders will likely opt for a procedural vote to ‘table’ the resolution or to refer it to the relevant committee for consideration via the traditional route – both moves that would all but kill the bill. If that fails, however, the legislation could very well pass with support from all Democrats and just a few House Republicans, given the GOP’s slim majority.

Luna accused conservatives of holding Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., ‘hostage’ on the matter in a letter to fellow House Republicans on Monday night. She also announced she was leaving the House Freedom Caucus, citing a small group of conservatives who have pressed leaders to kill her measure.

Luna’s bill, which is co-led by Rep. Brittney Pettersen, D-Colo., would give new moms and dads serving in Congress the ability to vote by proxy for up to 12 weeks surrounding the birth of their child.

In her letter she shared praise for House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., whose conduct she called ‘gentlemanly,’ but added, ‘With a heavy heart, I am resigning from the Freedom Caucus.’

‘I cannot remain part of a caucus where a select few operate outside its guidelines, misuse its name, broker backroom deals that undermine its core values and where the lines of compromise and transaction are blurred, disparage me to the press, and encourage misrepresentation of me to the American people,’ Luna wrote.

Johnson said he believed proxy voting was ‘unconstitutional’ in remarks after House Republicans’ regular closed-door meeting last week, and spoke out on the issue again this week.

‘We addressed this in conference this morning. A couple of our, a handful of our colleagues, have gotten behind the effort, and, look, I’m a father. I’m pro-family,’ the speaker said last week. ‘Here’s the problem. If you create a proxy vote opportunity just for young parents, mothers and, the fathers in those situations, then where is the limiting principle?’

Federal Judge James Boasberg is facing mounting criticism from President Donald Trump and his allies as he presides over multiple high-profile lawsuits targeting the Trump administration – cases that have now brought the judge’s personal and professional ties under fresh scrutiny. 

Boasberg, who was previously appointed to the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and reportedly once roomed with Justice Brett Kavanaugh at Yale, has become a flashpoint for conservatives who accuse the judiciary of bias against the Trump administration. Now the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Boasberg’s recent orders halting deportations of violent illegal immigrants and overseeing cases tied to leaked internal communications have amplified claims of partisanship and drawn fierce rebukes from Trump and his allies.

‘The Chief Justice handpicked DC Obama Judge Jeb Boasberg to serve on the FISA court,’ said Mike Davis, president of the Article III Project. ‘The DC federal judges are in a cozy little club, and they protect their own.’ His comments echo a broader sentiment on the right that Boasberg’s judicial decisions – and his close ties within the legal establishment – reflect a partisan tilt against the president.

Boasberg, a Washington, D.C., native, earned an advanced degree in Modern European History from Oxford University in 1986 and later attended Yale Law School, where he lived with Kavanaugh, according to multiple reports.  

He graduated in 1990 and clerked for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals before joining Keker & Van Nest in San Francisco as a litigation associate from 1991 to 1994. He later worked at Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd & Evans in Washington from 1995 to 1996.

After serving in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, Boasberg was appointed in 2002 by then-President George W. Bush to serve as an associate judge on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, the local trial court for the District. In 2011, then-President Barack Obama nominated him to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, where he was confirmed by the Senate and received his commission on March 17, 2011.

Boasberg was appointed to serve a seven-year term on the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISA Court, by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. 

The FISA Court is made up of 11 federal judges, all of whom are hand-selected by the chief justice. After undergoing rigorous background checks, FISA Court judges are then responsible for approving surveillance requests and wiretap warrants submitted by federal prosecutors, law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Most of the court’s work remains classified.

Boasberg served as the court’s presiding judge from 2020 to 2021 before returning to the D.C. District Court.

After Boasberg on March 15 ordered the Trump administration to halt its deportations of illegal immigrants under a 1798 wartime authority, Trump took to Truth Social to call for his impeachment. The president’s remarks echoed a growing chorus of conservatives who have recently called for the impeachment of federal judges overseeing his administration’s legal battles.

‘I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!’ Trump wrote in the post.

In an unprecedented move by the nation’s high court, Roberts released a public statement shortly thereafter, denouncing impeachment as an appropriate response to judicial disagreements. 

‘For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,’ he said in the statement released in mid-March.

Trump once again unloaded on Boasberg in a March 30 Truth Social post after the judge extended his restraining order on March 28. The extension will run through April 12. 

‘People are shocked by what is going on with the Court System. I was elected for many reasons, but a principal one was LAW AND ORDER, a big part of which is QUICKLY removing a vast Criminal Network of individuals, who came into our Country through the Crooked Joe Biden Open Borders Policy! These are dangerous and violent people, who kill, maim and, in many other ways, harm the people of our Country,’ Trump wrote on the social media platform. 

‘The Voters want them OUT, and said so in Record Numbers. If it was up to District Judge Boasberg and other Radical Left Judges, nobody would be removed, the President wouldn’t be allowed to do his job, and people’s lives would be devastated all throughout our Country. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!,’ he continued. 

Boasberg came under additional fire after he was randomly assigned to preside over a lawsuit involving the Trump administration’s leaked Signal chat. 

After Boasberg was assigned to the case, Trump again took to Truth Social and accused Boasberg of ‘grabbing the ‘Trump Cases’ all to himself.’

Davis also took to social media, writing, ‘Judge Jeb Boasberg is lighting on fire his legitimacy over an unnecessary, lawless, and dangerous pissing match with the President Jeb will lose. 

‘Let’s hope the Chief Justice doesn’t light the entire federal judiciary’s legitimacy on fire by siding with his personal buddy Jeb,’ Davis wrote. 

At the start of the March 27 hearing, Boasberg emphasized that he was randomly assigned to the case through a docket computer system.

‘That’s how it works, and that’s how all cases continue to be assigned in this court,’ Boasberg said during the hearing. 

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House, the Supreme Court, and the D.C. District Court for additional comment.

Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch, Emma Colton and Alex Nitzberg contributed to this report. 

A resolution to impeach U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg is still gaining support despite House GOP leaders’ hesitation to move on such a measure.

Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced an article of impeachment against Boasberg last month after he issued an emergency order temporarily halting the Trump administration’s deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act.

Reps. Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., and Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., signed onto the bill as co-sponsors last week, Fox News Digital was told, despite House GOP leaders signaling around the same time that they have little appetite to pursue that route.

The resolution now has 22 total co-sponsors – suggesting the effort is still alive and well among conservatives in the House Republican conference.

President Donald Trump is using the Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected Tren De Aragua gang members to a detention facility in El Salvador. 

Boasberg’s standoff with the Trump administration, which includes accusations the White House ignored his initial order that the administration has denied, has sent shock waves through Capitol Hill. 

Republicans see it as one of the most egregious examples of ‘rogue judges’ blocking Trump’s agenda. 

Trump himself singled out Boasberg and called for his impeachment over the legal showdown.

More than a dozen injunctions have been levied against various Trump policies, with targets ranging from birthright citizenship reform to the Department of Government Efficiency.

However, House GOP leaders are hesitant to support impeachment as a method to target Boasberg and other judges – believing it to be a less effective route to accountability.

Several rank-and-file Republican lawmakers suggested to Fox News Digital last month that they would not support such a move, giving it long odds of success in the House.

Gill’s resolution accused Boasberg of abusing his power.

He could still force a House-wide vote on the measure by reintroducing it as a ‘privileged resolution,’ giving leaders two legislative days to hold at least one procedural vote.

As of last week, however, Gill told Fox News Digital he had no plans to do so.

It comes as House Republicans coalesce around legislation by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., to limit district judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions. That bill is expected to get a vote on Wednesday afternoon.

Lt. Gen. Daniel ‘Razin’ Caine, President Donald Trump’s nominee to be the U.S. top military officer, side-stepped questions from Senate Democrats about his view on the recent Signal leak controversy roiling the Trump administration, but he did say the ‘element of surprise was likely lost’ as a result of the incident. 

Democrats, including Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Jack Reed, D-R.I., and Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, repeatedly asked Caine about how he would respond to hypothetical scenarios regarding the leak, during a Thursday confirmation hearing in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Caine, careful with his responses, repeatedly stressed the importance of ‘preserv[ing] the element of surprise,’ adding that he has ‘always’ communicated sensitive information using the proper channels. 

While the Trump administration and its supporters have denied that anything discussed in the Signal chat amounted to war plans, critics have disagreed, citing the fact the chats included a detailed timeline about a U.S. attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen.

‘Because of your extraordinary service, general, I can’t imagine anyone better qualified to answer this question,’ Blumenthal said to Caine. ‘Knowing what you do, about the substance of that conversation, how would you feel?’

‘I think we all can agree that we need to always protect the element of surprise, and that element of surprise was very likely lost,’ Caine responded. 

Hirono questioned Caine with a similar hypothetical but went a step further and asked if he would ‘just let this matter drop,’ as she claimed the Trump administration is doing.

‘It’s really not a hypothetical. It is what is confronting this administration,’ Hirono said.

‘Given the fact that the chairman and ranking member have asked for an investigation, I don’t want to comment on the particulars,’ Caine relented as Hirono hounded for an answer. ‘I do want to stay at the strategic altitude and say that we should always preserve the element of surprise.’

Reed proceeded to ask Ciane if he ‘were on that conversation’ would he have ‘objected to the fact that it was being conducted on Signal?’

‘Well, Senator, you know, I was not in that chat,’ Caine responded.

‘I know that that’s why I asked if you were,’ Reed said.

Caine asserted that he has ‘always communicated proper information in the proper channels.’

Caine was tapped by Trump to replace Biden-appointed Gen. Charles Q. ‘C.Q.’ Brown Jr. after he was fired in February.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) is a group of senior military officials who advise the president, the Secretary of Defense and the National Security Council on military matters. The JCS consists of the highest-ranking officers from the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and National Guard, with the chairman serving as the highest principal military advisor.

The chairman is typically required to have served as a four-star general in charge of a military service branch or as a combatant commander, qualifications Caine does not possess. However, the president has the authority to waive these requirements if deemed necessary for national interests. 

Caine’s extensive Air Force military background includes serving as a decorated F-16 combat pilot and playing critical roles in special intelligence operations. Given the slim Republican majority, his full Senate confirmation would require near-unanimous support from Republican senators.