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.

As President Donald Trump edges closer to potentially bombing Tehran, Iran, the intelligence community does not yet believe Iran is moving toward a nuclear weapon. 

‘If they don’t do a deal, there will be bombing,’ Trump said Sunday. It was not clear whether that meant Israel or the U.S. would bomb Tehran. ‘There’s a chance that if they don’t make a deal, that I will do secondary tariffs on them like I did four years ago,’ he added. 

Secondary ‘tariffs,’ or sanctions, would mean slapping financial penalties on any country that does business with Iran. 

However, Trump’s threat of direct war on Tehran comes just after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard insisted last week Iran is not building a nuclear weapon – at least not yet. 

‘The IC [intelligence community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapon program that he suspended in 2003,’ Gabbard told a worldwide threat hearing held by the Senate Intelligence Community last week. 

Experts believe Iran is enriching uranium to 60%, which puts it just below the 90% needed for a nuclear weapon, and have said there is no civilian use for 60% enriched uranium. 

‘The IC continues to monitor closely if Tehran decides to reauthorize its nuclear weapons program. In the past year we’ve seen an erosion in the decades-long taboo in Iran of discussing nuclear weapons in public, likely emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran’s decision making apparatus,’ Gabbard said. 

She added that Iran’s uranium enrichment was ‘at its highest levels’ and is ‘unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.’ 

The IC’s annual threat assessment, released in conjunction with the hearing, predicted Iran would continue efforts to threaten U.S. citizens and conduct operations inside the U.S. 

‘Tehran will try to leverage its robust missile capability and expanded nuclear program, and its diplomatic outreach to regional states and U.S. rivals to bolster its regional influence and ensure regime survival,’ the report said. ‘However, regional and domestic challenges, most immediately tensions with Israel, are seriously testing Iran’s ambitions and capabilities.’

The report detailed the ‘lethality’ of Iran’s missiles and UAV systems but said little else about the threat of Iran’s nuclear program. 

It assessed Iran’s capabilities, degraded by Israel, would be able to deter further offensive Israeli actions. 

‘The IC assesses Iran’s prospects for reconstituting force losses and posing a credible deterrent, particularly to Israeli actions, are dim in the near-term,’ the report said.

JINSA President and CEO Michael Makovsky offered a separate assessment, telling Fox News Digital, ‘Their enrichment program is about as far as you can get, so that part is done. So the question is the weapons part.… the issue today is less weaponization and more about opportunity.’

Behnam Ben Taleblu, an analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, added a broader critique. ‘When the IC, reporters or open-source analysts fail to connect the dots between strategy, capability and intention when looking at Iran’s atomic infrastructure … they do a public disservice to the public national debate.’

He said that worldwide threat assessments ‘should but be politicized,’ but ‘intelligence officials must be asked, if Iran isn’t building a weapon, why has it invested so much time, labor and capital into this quest?’

Tehran’s moves toward an atomic weapon is not a dash, but a ‘slow and steady quest to develop the world’s most dangerous weapons as safely as possible,’ said Taleblu. 

The renewed threat comes as the U.S. is bolstering its forces in the Middle East. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth recently sent a second aircraft carrier, USS Carl Vinson, to join the USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group, whose deployment was also extended. 

The U.S. also recently deployed two B-2 stealth bombers to the Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean, a warning to Iran and Yemen’s Houthi militia. The planes are capable of carrying 30,000-pound ‘bunker buster’ bombs and are now situated within range of Iran. 

In his first term, Trump withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal signed by then-President Barack Obama, deeming it a ‘bad deal’ that did not curb Iran’s nuclear program. 

He has already ordered his administration to bring ‘maximum pressure’ back to Tehran, choking them financially from every lever of government. 

First lady Melania Trump will recognize courageous women from all corners of the world at the State Department Tuesday and is expected to celebrate ‘the extraordinary strength of women who embody love in action around the globe.’ 

The first lady is returning to the State Department for her fifth year participating in the Secretary of State’s International Women of Courage Awards. 

The event will recognize women from around the globe who have ‘bravely stood up for many of the values we cherish here in the United States.’ 

The first lady is expected to focus on ‘love as a source of strength’ during her remarks Tuesday and is expected to call love a ‘universal language.’ 

The first lady is also expected to honor the courageous and ‘extraordinary’ women who will receive the annual awards. 

‘Mrs. Trump will highlight the profound connection between the love and courage shown by this year’s honorees,’ first lady spokesman Nick Clemens told Fox News Digital. ‘She looks forward to celebrating the extraordinary strength of women who embody love in action around the globe.’ 

Recipients include women from Burkina Faso in West Africa, Israel, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, South Sudan, Sri Lanka and Yemen. 

One of the recipients, Amit Soussana, was taken hostage by Hamas in Israel during the Oct. 7, 2023 attack. Soussana is an advocate for the hostages that remain under Hamas control. 

The IWOC Award is in its 19th year and recognizes women from around the world who have demonstrated ‘exceptional courage, strength, and leadership — often at great personal risk and sacrifice.’ 

The State Department said that since 2007, it has recognized more than 200 women from more than 90 countries with the IWOC Award. 

U.S. diplomatic missions overseas nominate one woman of courage from their respective host countries, and finalists are selected and approved by senior Department officials.  

Two key bills backed by President Donald Trump are expected to get a vote this week as Republican lawmakers continue their first 100-day sprint of trying to enact the White House’s agenda.

The No Rogue Rulings Act (NORRA Act) by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., would limit district court judges’ ability to issue orders blocking Trump policies nationwide. Additionally, the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, is aimed at requiring proof of citizenship in the voting registration process.

It signifies Trump’s continued dominance over congressional Republicans’ agenda, at a time when Democrats are struggling to coalesce around a singular message or leader.

The former legislation is a response to Trump’s ongoing standoff with judges paralyzing his agenda, while the latter is a bill that the president and his allies have long pushed for.

The bills advanced through the House Rules Committee on Tuesday in an expected party-line vote.

An original plan to have the bills voted through the panel on Monday night was upended after House GOP leaders attempted to insert language into the joint ‘rule’ that would have killed an unrelated bid by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., to install remote voting for new parents in the House.

It led to a brief hold-up on Tuesday morning before the language blocking Luna was ultimately included in the measure.

The Rules Committee acts as the final gatekeeper to legislation before it’s considered House-wide. The next step will be a procedural ‘rule’ vote expected on Tuesday afternoon. If passed, that will set up lawmakers to debate both bills before voting sometime this week.

Issa’s bill is coming for a House-wide vote on Wednesday afternoon as Trump is pushing his congressional allies to fight back against what Republicans view as ‘activist judges’ trying to block their agenda.

Two people familiar with discussions said earlier this month that Capitol Hill aides were told Trump ‘likes’ the bill. Meanwhile, Roy’s bill has been pushed by both Trump and various conservative groups since before the 2024 election.

Democrats have argued that if passed, it would disenfranchise women by making it harder for married women who have changed their last names to vote. Republicans say it is a necessary crackdown to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in federal elections, which is already against the law.

The SAVE Act passed the House with five Democrats voting in favor of the bill in July last year, but was never taken up by the Senate, then controlled by now-Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

House GOP leaders called on lawmakers on both sides to support this bill this week, however. It’s expected to come for a House-wide vote on Thursday morning.

‘American citizens – and only American citizens – should decide American elections,’ House GOP leaders said in a joint statement. 

‘This legislation cements into law President Trump’s executive action to secure our voter registration process and protect the voices of American voters. We urge all our colleagues in the House to join us in doing what the overwhelming majority of people in this country rightfully demand and deserve.’