TheGatewayPundit.com

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals delivered a decisive blow to the left’s relentless lawfare on Friday.

The court granted an emergency stay, suspending a lower court’s absurd preliminary injunction that sought to hamstring Elon Musk, the United States DOGE Service, and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from carrying out their mission to streamline a bloated and inefficient government—starting with the outdated United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

The original ruling, handed down by a Maryland district court on March 18 by Judge Theodore Chuang, was a textbook case of judicial overreach, cheered on by 26 anonymous USAID bureaucrats desperate to cling to their cushy government gigs.

Judge Chuang, an appointee of Barack Obama, issued a 68-page opinion asserting that the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) initiative to dissolve USAID likely violated the Constitution.

Activist judges are openly reshaping democracy through
political rulings, defying constitutional neutrality and undermining the will
of the people —all in the name of “saving democracy.”

AmGreatness.com

Democracy dies in darkness—or so the Trump-era Washington Post would have us believe. That’s a nice-sounding sentiment (and one that should have applied to the paper and its reporting long before Donald Trump arrived in the White House), but it’s also trite and naïve. It is far closer to the truth to say that democracy dies out in the open, in the daylight, right in front of our faces, and with the approval of most of the people working at The Washington Post. In reality, democracy dies in the courtrooms and judges’ quarters of our nation.

As the Trump Administration is thwarted in its efforts to cut federal spending, bloat, and waste time and again by activist judges, the people of the country must understand what is going on and what it likely says about the nation’s future. These judges—most of whom were appointed by Democratic presidents Clinton, Obama, and Biden—have taken it upon themselves to make policy and to engage in political maneuvering to spare the political status quo the fate for which the American people voted last November. Unironically and unapologetically, they are undoing the will of demos, purportedly to save democracy.

Interestingly, the Democrats who cheer the activist judges and their rulings are open and unremorseful about their overt injection of politics into the system of judicial review. Chuck Schumer, the Senate Minority Leader, crowed to PBS “Newshour” this week that he and his fellow Democrats are responsible for “saving democracy” because they intentionally packed the courts with judges that shared their ideology and would be unafraid to apply it to any case involving President Trump. “We did put 235 judges, 235 progressive judges, judges not under the control of Trump, last year on the bench, and they are ruling against Trump time after time after time.”

The point of all the injunctions and restraining orders is to preserve
the supreme rule of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.

TheFederalist.com

At this point it’s not too much to say that the federal judiciary has plunged us into a constitutional crisis. The fusillade of injunctions and temporary restraining orders issued by district court judges in recent weeks against the Trump administration — on everything from foreign aid to immigration enforcement to Defense Department enlistment policy to climate change grants for Citibank — boggles the mind.

More nationwide injunctions and restraining orders have been issued against Trump in the past month that were issued against the Biden administration in four years. On Wednesday alone, four different federal judges ordered Elon Musk to reinstate USAID workers (something he and DOGE have no authority to do), ordered President Trump to disclose sensitive operational details about the deportation flights of alleged terrorists, ordered the Department of Defense to admit individuals suffering from gender dysphoria to the military, and ordered the Department of Education to issue $600 million in DEI grants to schools.

Boasberg’s ruling is just the latest example of a judge substituting
his own political preferences for executive decision-making.

TheFederalist.com

President Donald Trump made headlines this week by continuing deportation flights of illegal immigrants, including members of the violent Tren de Aragua gang, despite a federal judge’s ruling that attempted to halt the practice.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, issued an order barring the administration from carrying out deportations to El Salvador. The White House called the decision “lawless” and said the order was moot because the flights had already left and crossed into international waters. It has stopped further such flights for now.

Infowars.com

The Obama judge who blocked President Trump’s deportation flights last weekend played a central role in the Russiagate collusion hoax.

Within hours of President Trump invoking the 200-year-old Alien Enemies Act to expedite the deportation of Venezuelan gangbangers, Judge James Boasberg moved to block the President and even ordered planes in the air, including one bound for El Salvador, to be turned around.

According to a report from journalist Jerry Dunleavy, Judge Boasberg was heavily involved in the Russiagate collusion hoax that was used to belabour President Trump during his first term.

As the head of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court, Boasberg “made a number of divisive decisions, including a slap on the wrist for a member of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team, the appointment of officials who had defended the FBI’s actions during the Russiagate saga, the renewal of the FBI’s FISA powers, and more,” Dunleavy wrote.

TheGatewayPundit.com

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer admitted on PBS this week that Democrats intentionally stacked the courts with 235 “progressive judges” in order to stop President Donald Trump “time after time after time.”

Since President Trump triumphantly returned to the White House on January 20, 2025, his administration has faced an all-out legal assault — not from Congress or the will of the American people — but from a weaponized judicial branch hijacked by radical leftists.

In just under two months, President Trump has been hit with 132 legal challenges, with only two resolved.

And now, Chuck Schumer has admitted it all on national television.

TheGatewayPundit.com

Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) has called on Congress to curtail federal judges’ authority to issue nationwide injunctions.

These sweeping court orders have increasingly been used to halt federal policies across the entire country, often based on the ruling of a single judge.

Senator Hawley argues that such injunctions undermine the separation of powers by allowing unelected judges to wield excessive influence over national policy.

He asserts that this practice disrupts the balance intended by the framers of the Constitution, granting the judiciary undue authority over the executive and legislative branches.

TheGatewayPundit.com

Attorney General Pam Bondi has unleashed a blistering emergency motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, demanding an immediate stay of an “outrageous overreach” by Obama-appointed District Judge James E. “Jeb” Boasberg.

The motion, filed early Saturday morning, accuses Boasberg of sabotaging the Trump administration’s national security agenda by issuing an “unauthorized” Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that blocks the removal of dangerous illegal aliens tied to the notorious Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua (TdA)—a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).

The explosive filing accuses Boasberg of acting without jurisdiction, without evidence, and without even hearing from the government—rushing to issue a 14-day TRO just hours after five anonymous Venezuelan plaintiffs filed a class-action complaint.

GatewayHispanic.com

The legal case against Donald Trump in New York isn't just a blatant political attack—it's a cesspool of corruption that stinks from a thousand miles away.

At the center of this swamp is Judge Juan Merchan, a supposed "impartial" figure who, according to new revelations, should never have set foot in that courtroom.

The legal case against Donald Trump in New York isn't just a blatant political attack—it's a cesspool of corruption that stinks from thousands away.

At the center of this swamp is Judge Juan Merchan, a supposed "impartial" figure who, according to new revelations, should never have set foot in that courtroom.

TheGatewayPundit.com

Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald J. Trump has been met with an unprecedented legal onslaught from far-left activist judges and groups determined to sabotage his administration at every turn.

Appearing on The War Room with Steve Bannon, Josh Hammer, Senior Counsel for the Article III Project, warned that what America is witnessing is not just judicial activism—it’s an outright judicial insurrection.

This is similar to how the communist left attacked him using a cadre of radical activist judges his first time in office.

After nearly two months in office, these radical extremist judges continue to wreak havoc on the Trump administration and the country.