Karoline Leavitt UNLEASHES on Federal Judge—and His Wife—Over Trump Deportation Ruling, and What She Revealed Has D.C. in Uproar

 

It started as a routine press briefing.

But by the end of it, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt had torched a federal judge, dragged his wife into the fire, and confirmed a long-suspected fracture between the judiciary and Trump’s inner circle.

“This isn’t about the law anymore,” she said. “This is about partisanship hiding behind a robe.”

And just like that, Karoline Leavitt didn’t just call out the ruling—she called out the judge, his background, his marriage, and the political machine she claims is working to block President Trump’s authority.

The Flashpoint: A Ruling That Stopped Planes in the Air

The drama erupted after Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary order blocking Trump’s latest mass deportation initiative—a program that used wartime authority to remove suspected foreign gang members linked to violent incidents in U.S. cities.

Boasberg’s ruling came mid-flight.

At least three planes carrying Venezuelan nationals were reportedly in the air when the order was issued.

The administration—caught off guard—pushed back hard.

Trump called Boasberg a “radical left lunatic.”

Leavitt? She went further.

“This judge is actively trying to say the President doesn’t have the power to remove terrorists from U.S. soil,” she said. “That is judicial overreach in its most dangerous form.”

Karoline Doesn’t Stop There—She Brings the Judge’s Wife Into It

In a move that stunned even some of her own allies, Leavitt named Boasberg’s wife, Elizabeth Manson, and disclosed more than $10,000 in political donations she reportedly made to Democratic candidates.

“You want to talk about neutrality? Let’s start at home,” Leavitt said. “This isn’t blind justice. This is a family operation.”

She accused the judge of having “a clear, personal disdain” for Trump and using his position to interfere with lawful executive action.

The statement prompted a flurry of responses from legal scholars, political commentators, and ethics watchdogs—some praising her courage, others calling the move reckless and incendiary.

A White House Offense—or a Political Line Crossed?

Legal experts were quick to weigh in.

“It is highly unusual for a press secretary to name a judge’s spouse in this way,” said one law professor.
“It breaks every norm of judicial respect,” another added.
“But is it illegal? No. And that’s the problem—it’s political warfare, not legal argument.”

Meanwhile, Leavitt’s defenders cheered the move as long overdue.

“We’ve had activist judges for decades,” said one conservative strategist. “Finally someone’s calling them what they are—and exposing their networks.”

Who Is Judge James Boasberg—and Why Is This So Explosive?

Boasberg, a Yale Law graduate with an advanced degree from Oxford, was appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts to chair the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—one of the most technically demanding judicial roles in the U.S.

He’s known for his intellect, discretion, and meticulous rulings.

But to Trump allies, he represents something else: the last line of defense for what they call the “deep state.”

“You don’t get to wear a robe and hide behind procedure,” Leavitt said. “Not when you’re undoing national security policy in real time.”

The Political Fallout: What Leavitt May Have Unleashed

Within hours, the press room was abuzz with speculation.

Was this just a fiery defense of executive authority? Or a calculated strike designed to:

Discredit the ruling
Build a case for impeachment
And put every judge on notice before the next election cycle

Some sources say Leavitt’s remarks were previewed and approved by Trump himself, as part of a broader campaign to reframe judicial resistance as partisan sabotage.

“This wasn’t off-script,” said one campaign adviser. “This was a warning shot.”

The Boasbergs Respond—Sort Of

Judge Boasberg has not made a public statement.

But legal sources close to the family say both he and his wife were “deeply rattled” by the personal nature of the attack.

“This crossed a line,” one former federal judge told us. “And the silence from the bench may not last much longer.”

Behind closed doors, multiple judicial associations are reportedly discussing a formal letter of protest.

Social Media Reacts: Applause, Outrage, and Theories

Online, the debate exploded.

“Leavitt just did what every conservative has wanted for years—call out judicial bias by name.”
“This isn’t bravery. It’s dangerous. Judges have families too.”
“Her facts were right. The donations are real. So why is everyone mad she said them?”
“Is this about immigration—or about intimidating the courts before November?”

#LeavittVsBoasberg and #JudicialOverreach both trended nationwide.

A Bigger Conversation: Can the Judiciary Remain Untouchable?

Leavitt’s comments have reignited a long-standing tension: Should judges be immune to political scrutiny when their rulings affect national policy?

For decades, presidents have criticized rulings. But naming a judge’s spouse, and tying her donations to judicial intent, may be a new line entirely.

“What Karoline did,” said one legal analyst, “was blur the line between judicial independence and political accountability. And the reaction proves just how fragile that line really is.”

Karoline Leavitt didn’t just defend a policy.
She launched a political grenade—and named names no one expected her to.

In doing so, she exposed a rift between executive power and judicial resistance—one that’s now playing out live, across courtrooms, newsrooms, and dinner tables nationwide.

And for Judge Boasberg and his wife, the cost of a single ruling may now be personal, public, and permanent.

“This was never just about one flight,” a Capitol Hill aide said.
“It’s about whether courts still rule—or whether politics now rules them.”

 

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt branded a judge who ruled against the administration an ‘activist’ who was trying to ‘usurp the president’s authority’

Leavitt brought up the judge’s wife Elizabeth Manson’s political contributions, saying she has donated more than $10,000 to Democrats, and said ‘he has consistently shown his disdain for this President and his policies, and it’s unacceptable.’

 

A reporter noted at the briefing that while Obama elevated the judge, he was earlier a Superior Court appointee of President George W. Bush.

That prompted Leavitt to argue that ’67 percent of all of the injunctions in this century have come against which president? Donald J. Trump.’

She added: ‘Let me say that again – 60 percent of the injunctions bipartisan activists in the judicial branch have come against President Donald Trump.’

Leavitt said it was part of a clear effort by ‘leftists who don’t like this president and are trying to impose or slow down positions.’

One lawyer, David Lurie, wasn’t persuaded. He posted: ‘Leavitt is trumpeting the fact that courts have enjoined many of Trump’s actions as evidence judges are engaged in misconduct Maybe, just maybe, it is an indication that Trump – a convicted felon – habitually breaks the law,’ he wrote.

Nor would Leavitt give ground when a reporter asked why the administration would not identify the people flown to El Salvador, who the administration says were members of violent gangs, despite posting images of some of them on social media.

‘We are not going to reveal operational details about a counterterrorism operation,’ she said.

‘We have the highest degree of confidence in our ICE agents and our Customs Border Patrol agents who have committed their lives to targeting illegal criminals in our country, particularly foreign terrorists,’ she said.

Without such a list, it is difficult to assess the allegations against the deportees.

Judge Boasberg hosted a contentious hearing with DOJ lawyers Wednesday, and said he wants to find out whether the government ‘deliberately flouted’ his order.

Leavitt spoke as lawmakers from the dominant MAGA wing of the House Republican Conference took Donald Trump‘s cue and made early steps to impeach a judge the president branded a ‘radical left lunatic’ for ruling to pause deportation flights.

The latest Trump loyalist to get behind the effort was Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert, who was not persuaded by pushback from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.

‘I voted for President Trump, not activist judges! Congress must impeach those obstructing the agenda Americans overwhelmingly supported,’ Boebert posted on X.

She got a seal of approval from billionaire powerhouse Trump advisor Elon Musk, who weighed in on an online post from the pro-MAGA ‘Wake up America’ account surveying the public about Boebert’s impeachment move.

Musk responded with an emoji signaling ‘100’ percent.

Trump himself was unpersuaded by Roberts, once again calling Judge James Boasberg a ‘lunatic’ after a court clash with the administration, which flew more than 200 alleged gangsters to El Salvador and said they were members of Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua or MS-13.

The president wrote on his Truth Social account Wednesday: ‘If a President doesn’t have the right to throw murderers, and other criminals, out of our Country because a Radical Left Lunatic Judge wants to assume the role of President, then our Country is in very big trouble, and destined to fail!’

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) called for impeaching judges obstructing the agenda Americans overwhelmingly supported’

In the last Congress, Boebert filed a resolution to impeach President Joe Biden for ‘unconstitutional dereliction of duty’ over his border policy.

Earlier, Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) said he would be ‘filing Articles of Impeachment against activist judge James Boasberg this week.’

‘Necessary,’ wrote Musk on his X site.

Legal scholars are already warning that Trump is violating the separation of powers by bucking judicial review of his decisions.

‘This is nuts, what’s going on in front of Judge Boasberg,’ former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb told CNN’s ‘Out Front.’

‘I think Judge Boasberg, who by the way is highly regarded and actually is the single most qualified judge in the country to handle the issue before him as the former head of the FISA court and the current head of the alien deportation court,’ Cobb added.

Musk weighed in on yet another judge who issued another ruling – this one against the administration’s move against transgender members of the military.

Elon Musk continues to push moves to impeach federal judges

Trump tore into Boasberg and ‘crooked’ judges after a clash over the timing of his order to halt deportations of more than 200 people

‘This is a judicial coup. We need 60 senators to impeach the judges and restore rule of the people.’

Sixty is the number of senators to break a filibuster, but two-thirds of the 100-person Senate must vote to convict a judge during an impeachment trial. Article III judges ‘hold their office during good behavior,’ according to the Constitution, meaning lifetime appointments.

Roberts issued his stunning rebuke Tuesday after Trump called for the impeachment of the judge who had blocked his bid to send people he said were members of a violent Venezuelan gang to El Salvador.

The Justice Department blasted Boasberg in a new filing for running down ‘picayune’ details about the flights in an effort to discern when exactly the removal occurred in relation to his order, accusing the court of ‘digressive micromanagement’ and defending the decisions of a ‘coequal branch.’

It called his comment a ‘complete misunderstanding of the serious national security, safety, regulatory, and logistical problems presented by a fiat from the Court directed at pilots operating outside the United States and was made without regard to whether any such aircraft could feasibly be diverted or even had enough fuel to safely do so.’

 The latest court action came after Trump attacked the federal lower court judge as a ‘radical left lunatic’ in a wild tirade on social media.

But Roberts took the rare step of intervening and publicly slapping down the president.

‘For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,’ Roberts said in a curt statement issued by the Supreme Court. ‘The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.’

By that, Roberts meant that if the Trump administration has a problem with a judge’s ruling, it should appeal and fight the issue in court – rather than savage a Senate-confirmed judge in public.

Any ultimate appeal would end up before Roberts’ own body, in which conservatives hold a 6-3 majority and have backed Trump in the past.

The blast from the usually circumspect justice comes at a time when some liberal legal scholars say a constitutional crisis is looming, or already here, over a crush of court orders that would rein in constitutional authority Trump claims is his alone.

Although Roberts used language that was legalistic – and did not identify Trump by name – the public comment came just a few hours after Trump attacked a ‘radical left lunatic’ judge who had issued a temporary order barring the deportation of alleged gang members who the White House termed ‘heinous monsters.’

The ruling, from federal Judge James Boasberg, came after a fiery hearing where he demanded the government declare when it thinks his own orders on the deportations took effect – after the administration said the deportation flights were underway and over international waters when it learned of the order.

Trump posted on his Truth Social site Tuesday morning: ‘This Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, was not elected President – He didn’t WIN the popular VOTE (by a lot!), he didn’t WIN ALL SEVEN SWING STATES, he didn’t WIN 2,750 to 525 Counties, HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING!’

Chief Justice John Roberts slapped back at threats to impeach judges, just hours after President Trump tore into a federal judge he termed a ‘radical left lunatic’

More than 200 gang members deported to El Salvador from the US

‘I WON FOR MANY REASONS, IN AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE, BUT FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY. 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!!!’

After Roberts’ rare statement, Trump was asked during an interview with Laura Ingraham taped Tuesday for the Fox News Channel’s The Ingraham Angle what he made of the justice issuing one.

‘Well, he didn’t mention my name in the statement. I just saw it quickly. He didn’t mention my name,’ Trump responded.

The 78-year-old commander in chief also argued ‘many people have called for his impeachment, the impeachment of this judge. I don’t know who the judge is, but he’s radical left.’

Trump’s billionaire DOGE head and advisor Elon Musk has also been rallying to impeach judges who ruled against the administration on federal worker firings.

On Friday, in an extraordinary speech at the Justice Department, Trump praised Judge Aileen Cannon, a federal judge who ruled in his favor in the classified documents case. An appeal got withdrawn after Trump won the November election.

Trump said of Cannon: ‘I did appoint her federal judge and these fake lawyers these horrible human beings were hitting her so hard.’

All federal district court judges must be confirmed by the Senate in order to serve.

Last week, a federal judge in California ruled that the administration must reinstate thousands of fired ‘probationary’ employees.

Another federal judge in Maryland, U.S. District Judge James Bredar, also an Obama nominee, has also ruled that terminations of probationary employees was illegal.

House Republicans have taken up Musk’s call to impeach judges who have ruled against Trump.

Trump railed against judges who ruled against him during the campaign. He greeted Justice Roberts on the day of his speech to Congress earlier this month

Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) said he would be ‘filing Articles of Impeachment against activist judge James Boasberg this week.’

‘Necessary,’ wrote Musk on his X site.

Nevertheless, the conservative New York Post editorial board wrote that Musk was ‘way out of his lane’ on the matter.

The ruling that set off the fury came when Boasberg issued the temporary ruling that blocked the deportations of more than 200 people after the administration invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

The White House said Monday that the people deported to El Salvador were members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, but has refused to provide the names of the people now incarcerated in El Salvador.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the U.S. paid the country $6 million to accept them.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Steven Miller teed off on the judge at the White House on Monday when asked about his statement that the judge’s order was ‘illegal.’

‘The idea that a single district court judge has the authority to direct, as though they were the president, the movement of airplanes around the globe is … the most outrageous thing I’ve seen from a district court judge in my lifetime, frankly, going back multiple lifetimes.

Earlier this month, the American Bar Association issued a statement warning against attempts to ‘cow our country’s judges, our country’s courts and our legal profession.’ It said intimidation ‘cannot be sanctioned or normalized.’

The ABA said it would not ‘stay silent in the face of efforts to remake the legal profession into something that rewards those who agree with the government and punishes those who do not.’

Trump railed against judges who ruled against him in his four criminal trials throughout the campaign.

But in February and March, Musk began touring into judges using his powerful online platform.

‘We are witnessing an attempted coup of American democracy by radical left activists posing as judges!’ Musk wrote Feb. 11.

“There need to be some repercussions above ZERO for judges who make truly terrible decisions,” Musk continued.

On Feb. 25, he posted: ‘When judges egregiously undermine the democratic will of the people, they must be fired or democracy dies!’

The bar for impeaching an Article III federal judge is high. Only through a vote to impeach in the House and a two-thirds vote of the Senate can they be removed.

Another House Republican, Rep. Andy Ogles, introduced a resolution in February to impeach Judge John Bates after his order to federal health agencies to restore online data amid a Trump Administration crackdown on ‘gender ideology.’

Ogles, who issued a statement attacking ‘predators’ like the judge, a George W. Bush appointee, was unbowed by Roberts’ warning.

‘Respectfully, Mr. Chief Justice, both James Madison and Thomas Jefferson disagree with you. So does the Constitution. We are going to keep the impeachments coming,’ he wrote.