U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi dropped a bombshell announcement regarding one of the federal judges who has been most hostile to President Donald Trump and his agenda.
In an X post on Monday, Bondi wrote, “Today at my direction, @TheJusticeDept filed a misconduct complaint against U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration.” She added: “These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, and we will not stand for that.”
Today at my direction, @TheJusticeDept filed a misconduct complaint against U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration.
These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, and we will…
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) July 28, 2025
As USA Journal reported in May, federal district court judges within the DC circuit are assigned cases per a set of rules that essentially randomize court selection, but one particular jurist — Boasberg — keeps getting assigned very important cases having to do with executive actions taken by President Trump.
Readers know that Boasberg has been quite anti-Trump, and so has a group of GOP lawmakers. They now want to know why Boasberg keeps getting Trump cases when it’s statistically impossible for him to wind up with them naturally.
The House in April passed a bill to rein in rogue judges like Boasberg and others. Questions still remain, though, and that same month, Townhall.com obtained a letter from Reps. Jim Jordan (R-OH), Darrell Issa (R-CA), and Chip Roy (R-TX) regarding such concerns. The letter was sent to Angela D. Caesar, the Clerk of the Court for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
As the letter notes early on, Trump’s second term—just over 100 days in—already faced more than 30 nationwide injunctions. “Many of these nationwide injunctions have raised concerns that Article III judges are exceeding their constitutional authority by replacing the policy decisions of the duly elected President with their own preferences, eroding public trust in the integrity and fairness of our judicial system,” said the letter.
“Many high-profile cases challenging policy decisions of the Trump Administration have been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (District Court),” the letter continued, referencing a key concern as well as previewing how Congress may look to be doing more. “As Congress considers potential legislative reforms to address the abuse of nationwide injunctions and adjust the national distribution and local assignment of cases challenging Executive Branch policy decisions, we write to request information about the District Court’s assignment of cases.”
Among the cases assigned to Judge Boasberg are those concerning the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) for deportations, as well as matters involving officials’ use of the Signal messaging app. The letter highlights that Boasberg was given these “high-profile” cases less than two weeks apart. He was also assigned cases involving the Department of Government Efficiency and federal funding for programs alleged to violate civil rights laws. While the latter case was ultimately dismissed, it was at the request of the plaintiff.
