In yet another embarrassing defeat for activist judge James Boasberg, a three-judge panel from the DC appellate court—ironically all Trump appointees—put a decisive hold on his absurd attempt to extend constitutional protections to dangerous Venezuelan gang members deported to El Salvador.
Boasberg, already infamous among conservatives for his egregious judicial overreach, had shocked many when he blocked President Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport violent members of the Tren de Aragua criminal cartel. His ruling not only flaunted common sense but also raised serious questions about judges who wield their power to undermine national security.
On June 11, 2025, legal analyst Julie Keppy shared a major development on X, celebrating the appellate court’s intervention. She wrote, “Another strike out for Jeb Boasberg. Yesterday a 3-judge panel (all Trump appointees) of the DC appellate court put a hold on his latest gambit to give ‘due process’ rights to illegal Venezuelans tied to Tren de Aragua incarcerated in an El Salvador terror prison.”
The court’s order put on hold several portions of Boasberg’s June 4 ruling—specifically his preliminary injunction, class certification, and related deadlines—pending further review. The judges clarified that this administrative stay was to allow them “sufficient opportunity” to consider the emergency motion, making clear they were not yet ruling on the case’s merits.
This legal smackdown couldn’t come at a better time. Boasberg’s courtroom theatrics—he even dragged in Kafka’s *The Trial* to frame the case as some tragic legal nightmare—did little to impress the appellate judges or conservatives watching this case unfold.
In his ruling, Boasberg compared the detained Venezuelan gangsters’ experience to Josef K., the protagonist in Kafka’s classic novel who is arrested without explanation and forced to navigate an opaque, indifferent legal system. Boasberg wrote, “Bewildered by these men and distressed by their message, K. tries to comfort himself that he lives in ‘a state governed by law,’ one where ‘all statutes \[are] in force.’” He then recounted the surreal exchanges Josef K. has with unnamed authorities to paint the deportations as cruel and Kafkaesque.
But conservatives see it quite differently. These aren’t innocent victims lost in the system — they’re dangerous foreign criminals, members of a violent Venezuelan gang responsible for terror and mayhem. Allowing them to invoke “due process” rights meant for American citizens is not only illogical, it’s a direct threat to national security and public safety.
Boasberg’s attempt to grant these noncitizens expansive legal protections while ignoring the obvious security risks has been widely condemned as a gross abuse of judicial power. The DC appellate panel’s swift stay signals that the courts are willing to push back against this kind of woke judicial activism.
Senator Josh Hawley and other conservatives have been vocal about the need to rein in judges like Boasberg who undermine immigration enforcement and threaten America’s borders. This case serves as a stark reminder that the battle over America’s legal system and immigration policies is far from over.
As the appellate court reviews the emergency motion, the message is clear: America’s legal protections should not be extended to violent foreign gangsters who exploit the system to evade justice. It’s time to restore common sense to the judiciary and put national security first. Judge Boasberg’s Kafkaesque fantasies won’t stand in the way of that.
