On Wednesday, July 16, 2025, The Federalist reported that Chief Judge James Boasberg of the D.C. District Court informed Chief Justice John Roberts and approximately two dozen other judges about concerns among his colleagues that the Trump Administration might disregard federal court rulings, potentially triggering a constitutional crisis. The information was detailed in a memorandum obtained exclusively by The Federalist, highlighting discussions during a Judicial Conference meeting held in Washington, D.C., during the week of March 11, 2025.

The Judicial Conference, the national policymaking body for the federal courts, is chaired by Chief Justice Roberts and includes the chief judge of each judicial circuit, the chief judge of the Court of International Trade, and one district judge from each regional circuit, totaling around 30 judges. The group typically addresses administrative and policy issues affecting the federal court system and makes legislative recommendations to Congress.

However, during a working breakfast at the March meeting, Judge Boasberg raised the issue of the Trump Administration’s potential non-compliance with court orders, according to the memorandum.

The memorandum noted that Chief Justice Roberts expressed hope that such a scenario would not occur, avoiding a constitutional crisis. He also mentioned that his interactions with President Donald Trump had been civil, citing an instance where the President thanked him for administering the oath at the State of the Union address.

The concerns raised by Judge Boasberg are notable because President Trump is a defendant in numerous lawsuits, including several pending in the D.C. District Court.

The Federalist reported that Judge Boasberg’s remarks suggested a predisposition among some D.C. District Court judges against the Trump Administration, despite the administration’s compliance with all court orders to date. This stance appears to challenge the legal presumption of regularity, which assumes public officials fulfill their duties appropriately. The memorandum revealed that these judges were concerned specifically about the Trump Administration’s response to adverse rulings, even though no instances of non-compliance had occurred.

Days after the Judicial Conference, Judge Boasberg issued an order in a case involving removals to El Salvador, which the Supreme Court later determined he lacked jurisdiction to issue. The order directed the Trump Administration to halt the removals, and Boasberg subsequently found the administration in criminal contempt for not reversing the removals or returning individuals to the U.S., despite the injunction lacking specific instructions to do so.

Further details emerged from emails obtained by The Federalist related to a case involving Emil Bove, a Trump nominee for the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Bove, who served as principal associate deputy attorney general, was accused by a whistleblower of suggesting the Department of Justice (DOJ) ignore court orders. However, an email from the whistleblower’s supervisor clarified that Bove had advised the DOJ legal team to avoid actions that could lead to a court order disrupting an operation, not to disregard existing orders. This was consistent with Bove’s testimony during his confirmation hearing, where he stated under oath that he had never advised violating a court order.

Senator Chuck Grassley, Chair of the Judiciary Committee, emphasized that Bove’s guidance to avoid detrimental court orders aligned with his sworn statements and did not equate to instructing non-compliance.

 

 

Source: The Federalist