The hour-long hearing revealed a divided panel of three judges: Conservative Judge Karen Henderson (appointed by George H.W. Bush in 1990), Liberal Judge Patricia Millett (appointed by Barack Obama in 2013), and Conservative Judge Justin Walker (appointed by Trump in 2020). Henderson has a history of rulings favoring Trump, including rejecting IRS access to his tax records in 2018 and ending General Michael Flynn’s prosecution in 2020. Millett, conversely, ruled against Trump in 2021 by denying his bid to withhold January 6 records from Congress. Walker, the youngest D.C. Circuit appointee since 1983, previously served in the Western District of Kentucky. The panel includes one Democrat and two Republicans, though divisions emerged as government attorneys pushed to lift Judge Boasberg’s, allowing deportations to resume.
The case, which could escalate to the Supreme Court, underscores broader tensions over executive power and judicial oversight. Boasberg’s order expires on March 29, 2025, adding urgency to the appeals court’s pending decision, with no timeline specified for a ruling. As of today, no ruling has emerged from the D.C. Circuit, but the outcome could reshape deportation policy and executive authority. The losing side will likely appeal to the Supreme Court, setting the stage for a high-stakes legal battle.
Meanwhile, the House Judiciary Committee plans hearings this week to address what some Republicans call “activist judges” obstructing Trump’s agenda. The administration has faced over 15 injunctions from district courts on various policies. Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told Fox News that he expects a House vote next week on a bill by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) to bar district judges from issuing nationwide injunctions. Some House Republicans, including Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas), advocate impeaching judges like Boasberg, with Gill echoing Trump’s calls in a Fox News Digital interview. Support for Issa’s bill remains uncertain.
House Speaker Mike Johnson met with the House Judiciary Committee to further explore responses concerning the activist judges. The discussion was closed-door and held as the committee prepared for hearings on the issue. In addition to limiting the ability of district judges to issue nationwide injunctions, other lawmakers have discussed alternative options, including an impeachment option, even though there is skepticism about its feasibility.
House Republicans also expressed the idea of using Congress’s budgetary powers to defund federal courts issuing nationwide injunctions against President Trump’s agenda. However, some argue that this approach would be complicated as the process requires measures to have a primary fiscal impact, a determination made by the Senate parliamentarian. President Trump’s attorney, Jim Trusty, cautioned about straining an already overburdened judiciary. Currently, no plans have been set in stone regarding this matter.
