Below is my column in The Hill on two controversies involving Chief Judge James Boasberg this week in Washington, D.C. Both involve claims that branches undermined or intruded on the authority of another branch. However, these separation-of-powers conflicts produced strikingly different responses from Judge Boasberg. It seemed that the court’s concerns depended greatly on whose ox was being gored in a tripartite contest.
Here is the column:
For months, District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg has been very much in the news. This spring, he issued a 46-page decision finding that the Trump administration may be in contempt of court for violating his order to return flights of deportees being sent to El Salvador.
In that ruling, Boasberg insisted that it was essential for him to know the facts on whether “officials of a coordinate branch” had undermined judicial integrity. After all, nothing short of the separation of powers was at stake. This week, Boasberg announced that he was moving forward without further delay to ferret out who was responsible for the alleged violation.
That message, however, has now been undermined by another Judge James Boasberg, who is in the news this week as part of the controversy over the Justice Department’s acquisition of telephone records of leading Republican members of Congress. Boasberg had imposed a gag order on telephone companies to prevent them from informing Congress that the executive branch was snooping on who had been in contact with them.
These two James Boasbergs seem as different as the two Jeffrey Epsteins referenced this week by Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) — one a presumably respectable medical doctor, the other a deceased sex offender. However, to use Crockett’s formulation, it was indeed “that James Boasberg” in both cases.
The growing scandal over the seizure of telephone records of Republican members of Congress by former Special Counsel Jack Smith has continued to grow with new disclosures. This includes revelations that Smith obtained of records for former Speaker of the House of Representatives Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and House Judiciary Chair James Jordan (R-Ohio).
It is difficult to overstate the gravity of this intrusion into the legislative branch. These records can reveal whom members spoke with and when such calls took place. It can reveal communications with journalists, whistleblowers, and others speaking confidentially with representatives. It can also reveal embarrassing information about members from their personal numbers.
The gathering of such information without an obvious good cause can potentially deter members in confronting the Justice Department, which is notorious for leaking information against critics and targets.
Ironically, such leaks are at the heart of investigations led by the very targets of these orders, including Jordan and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). It also included McCarthy, the person second in line for the presidency, who could ultimately assume authority over the Justice Department under the Constitution.
The demand under Operation Arctic Frost was unprecedented in scope, with dozens of subpoenas going to such carriers as Verizon and AT&T. Nineteen such orders for these telephone records were accompanied by judicial nondisclosure orders for subpoenas signed by Boasberg. While commonly issued, these nondisclosures have long been controversial. It did not seem to matter that the Justice Department was targeting the very members exercising oversight over investigations into its own previous abusive use of investigatory powers.
It is still not clear for what crimes these members were being investigated. The order on Jordan in 2022 covered two prior years.
Not surprisingly, some Democratic apologists such as Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) immediately dismissed the gravity of such demands by the Justice Department. However, other Democrats have expressed alarm over the intrusion into such communications.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) stated, “On the surface of it, it would strike me as a significant invasion of the right of Senators to conduct their jobs, so this is something that needs urgent follow-up.”
Indeed, the move by Judge Boasberg shattered the very rules of engagement between the coequal and “coordinate branches” that the same Boasberg has repeatedly raised in his investigation of the Trump administration.
Boasberg signed these orders despite a federal law designed to prevent precisely this type of secret investigation of Congress. Federal law requires that “no law, rule, or regulation may be used to prevent a service provider from notifying a Senate office that data or records have been sought through legal process.”
Just in case there was any doubt, the law further states that “any provider for a Senate office … shall not be barred, through operation of any court order or any statutory provision, from notifying the Senate office of any legal process seeking disclosure.”
However, Boasberg signed orders that prevented the phone providers from informing members of Congress — members who were actively investigating abuses by the Justice Department — that they were now being subjected to precisely such investigations.
There is little question how Congress would have responded. You are seeing it unfold this week. However, they were never told even as they objected to open-ended and abusive investigations of thousands of citizens after the January 6 Capitol riot.
Boasberg was fully aware of those abuses, stretching back to the debunked Russiagate investigation, in which false information had been given to courts to carry out surveillance of Trump associates.
Indeed, it was Boasberg again who ordered the resulting investigation into the false information given to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as part of the Russiagate investigation. He was criticized for appointing an attorney to assist him, David Kris, whom the Washington Post described as “highly controversial” given his past denials of any wrongdoing by the Justice Department.
The wrongdoing was very real. An attorney at the FBI ultimately pleaded guilty to lying to the court in an effort to justify surveillance. Others were fired after Inspector General investigations exposed their abuse of investigatory powers.
Despite that history, Boasberg gagged phone carriers from informing Congress of the seizure of the telephone records of key Republican members overseeing investigations of the Justice Department.
I do not support the calls for Boasberg to be impeached, but his role in this scandal cannot be ignored. He not only enabled this abusive effort but also expressly told these companies not to reveal the demands to anyone.
None of this means that there are no legitimate questions raised about the failure to comply with his orders on the El Salvador flight. But Boasberg’s separation-of-powers concerns seem strangely selective, depending on whose powers are being usurped.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of the bestselling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.” He has also represented the House of Representatives in court.
“Boasberg gagged phone carriers from informing Congress.” Didn’t these ‘phone carriers’ hear the democrats’ public announcement that NO ONE is required to follow an illegal order? I’m sure the democrat party must be hopping mad that these unlawful mandates were issued in defiance of the law and will move heaven and earth to see that the parties responsible are held accountable. I’m am sooo sure.
This post is just another episode of the daily tv show. Put up or shut up.
Impartial justice.
But, of course.
Professor Turley is a fine human being, but I’m looking forward to the day he decides he’s done with cocktail parties. At that juncture, this blog’s usefulness will grow 100 fold.
Professor Turely deserves a social life just like everyone else. If he wants to improve the site he should make people register with their name and email and set certain common sense rules. Not any kind of censorship but things like attacking others and provoking others. Common courtesy would certainly improve the site.
Actually the 6 month rule does not apply. In this case the indictment was invalid from the start. It was illegally obtained.
Actually, you are yet again – as always – wrong. These indictments are not illegally obtained like the FISA spy warrants that Obama’s Attorney Generals and FBI Director Comey obtained by perjury in Judge Boasberg’s FISA courts.
But to have some fun with you cosplaying as an Internet Constitutional law expert, lets pretend you are right. Comey gets to run free despite all his years of committing perjury as both FBI Director and as disgraced civilian Comey, fired FBI Director.
Comey according to whoever you copied and pasted what you present her as your personal opinion is no longer under threat of indictment for his many felonies at the FBI and while appearing before Congress due to the Statute Of Limitations.
So Comey is now very low hanging and unprotected rotton Democrat fruit. His unprotected inindicted felon ass can be subpoenaed to appear before Congressional Committees. Where he can no longer respond to questions about his serial felonies by claiming the protection of the 5th Amendment – he can no longer be indicted for those felonies he committed.
And if Congress so chooses, they can hold field hearings at any place and time outside of the Capitol buildings in Washington DC and subpoena Comey to appear before them in that place.
In southern Wyoming (out of respect for recently deceased Democrat hero Dick Cheney) for example.
Imagine the entertainment value of James Comey trying to calculate whether he can perjure himself in front of a Wyoming committee and Grand Jury.
For god sake please do not call Dick Cheney a hero!
He and Comey are of the same cloth.
They are both deep state operatives manipulating government in secret,
And hsi daugher did not fall far from the tree and fortunately wven Wyoming could not stand her.
Comey is just a Dick Cheney wanna be.
One of the GOOD things about Trump and the GOP today is how marginalized the once powerful NeoCons have become.
Please do not make hero’s of them.
While they are neither as evil or danageorous as the progressive left they are NOT to be made hero’s of
“They are both deep state operatives manipulating government in secret” – Peter Thiel and Elon Musk with Palantir and DOGE, respectively, harvesting data and issuing dark directives. Or the invisible backers of Project 2025. They all paid good money to burrow into the Executive branch.
It’s very likely Bondi and Halligan could be disbarred because of their epic and incompetent handling of the Comey and James cases.
It’s very likely Bondi and Halligan could be disbarred because of their epic and incompetent handling of the Comey and James cases.
It’s very likely that you do not believe that. Even you know your long established record here as a psychotic serial liar whose lack of a developed prefrontal cortex leaves you unable to function as a decent, credible human being.
Even by your very low standards, X, that is a particularly stupid comment.
It truly is. Except that we thought George was an epically incompetent lawyer, but now I believe he is just epically incompetent and should be removed from the Turley bar.
ROFL.
You could not get John Eastman disbarred in California, you are not getting Bondi or Halligan disbarred.
Even if every idiot claim you have made was upheld by the Supreme court – that would just make them ordinary AG, US attorney’s who lost a legal fight over their constitutional power.
Are you disbarring Jack Smith or Merrit Garland for appointing him – that was not even a close call constitutionally,
So you have to keep offering this absurd idiotic claims ?
Once again John Say the Stupid engages in delusional flights of fancy.
John Eastman has been disbarred.
We are just waiting for the final order from the California Supreme Court which is inevitable and uncontestable at this point.
Yes, John Eastman has been disbarred by the California State Bar, with the State Bar Court’s Review Department upholding the recommendation for disbarment in June 2025. This decision was based on his misconduct related to the 2020 presidential election, including lying to courts, lying to the public, and trying to undermine the election results. Eastman was found to be culpable of 10 of the 11 charges filed against him.
The initial recommendation: A California State Bar Court hearing judge recommended disbarment in March 2024, finding Eastman guilty of serious ethical violations for his role in developing a plan to obstruct the counting of electoral votes on January 6, 2021.
The upheld ruling: In June 2025, the State Bar Court’s Review Department unanimously upheld the recommendation, finding his conduct to be intentional and egregious.
Consequences: The ruling makes Eastman ineligible to practice law in California, and his license is effectively suspended while the final process to make the disbarment a final order of the California Supreme Court takes place.
https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/193726
John Say hopes that repeating it will make it come true.
“I do not support the calls for Boasberg to be impeached, but his role in this scandal cannot be ignored.”
Ok, I’ll bite. What form of accountability do you recommend as an alternative to impeachment? Without accountability, this behavior won’t stop.
Skip impeachment. Too cumbersome. Go directly to closing the DC courts and revoking their jurisdiction while beginning criminal investigations of these rogue judges.
Hear, hear!
🤔, Young
For the stellar DC there 15 judges. 4 appointed by DJT and 11 appointed by Lunch Bucket and Rosemary’s Baby.
Article 3 is working as to good behavior. Have they been drunk or dissolute etc? Has the Chief Judge made errors that cannot be prosecuted? He cannot be impeached for his political view. He is not impartial which is required. Misconduct, separation of powers…
^^^ historically impeached judges have committed perjury, false income tax , bribery, drunkenness, mental instability so a crime will do. Grill Boasberg until he lies, perjury. He’s broken the law, surveillance.
^^^ It’s a serious problem in DC with a count of 11 to 4 and Boasberg was appointed by Damian. It’s very serious.
Grill Boasberg and move to the next in oversight. It’ll be legislative trolling judiciary but it’s a bad situation.
He has already committed a crime – violation of the constitutional rights of others under color of authority.
He violated a law passed by congress in order to infringe on the constitutional rights of senators and representatives.
John,
The old KKK law. Good thought. It is also used for civil liability against less protected officials.
The Trump impeachments established that the house can impeach for any reason including politics.
While they SHOULD not – they do have the power to.
But won’t get a conviction in the Senate.
You oppose impeachment. Then you owe your readers what other sanction you would support.
You seem to believe that simply publicizing his transgressions would somehow cause him such shame as to constitute a sanction against future transgressions.
Please assure us you are not that naive. The Left knows no shame for anything other than losing power.
Prof. Turley – based on YOUR article Boasberg has violated the law by precluding congress from being notified of a requiest for data on members of congress.
That should be more that sufficient for impeachment.
You did not note whether that law was crimingl or not – it is is – Boasberg should be charged criminally.
Even if it is not Boasberg could be prosecuted criminally and sued civily for violations of rights under color of law.
As can those who requested the surveilance of congress.
The ONLY possible salvation would be a very solid demonstration that there was probable cause that shose being surveiled had committed a crime.
Pretty sure there has not been anything approaching probable cause that any of these members of congress committed a crime.
Further even if true It is still a problem that congress more generally – such as via the gang of 8 was not notified.
Fealty to the law is one of the absolute requirements for a judge.
Nothing you have written suggests ambiguity with respect to the law – the law simply was not followed.
This is not a case of differing opinions on the meaning of the law.
This is just pure lawlessness.
This is the same nonsense we see in banana republics like Brazil where justices have taken over substantioal portions of executice and legislative power.
Judge Boasbergs conduct goes beyond the partisan biases that we have seen over the past 9 months – those are correctable, if painfully by the appeals process and the supreme court
One of the problems with Boasbergs conduct here is that it was not appealable and he KNEW that.
I am not sure we should EVER allow any form of legal process where constitutional rights are involved that is not strongly adversarial.
This case is a clear demonstration of why that is needed.
John Say, the law was not violated. That’s why Turley is not detailing any of the conduct from Boasberg as criminal.
Getting phone numbers, time, and dates is a very narrow request that meets legal requirements and does not harm congressmen in any meaningful way.
“ One of the problems with Boasbergs conduct here is that it was not appealable and he KNEW that.”
Because he did nothing wrong. The accusation of misconduct come from assumptions and unfounded allegations. That’s why nothing will happen.
X – Turley cited law that congress must be notified before supenas or warrants are issued against members of congress.
That did not happen – the law was violated. Boasberg was the judge – he was obligated to follow that law.
He did not. At the barest minimum the gang of 8 should have been notified. They were not.
But this gets worse. Nothing even approaching probable cause that any of these people committed a crime exists.
So Boasberg allowed spying on congressmen without probable cause as the constitution requires, and without notifying congress as the law requires.
Further while Crossfire Huricane was ongoing Boasberg headed the FISA court – so he KNOWS exactly what the greatest latitude allowed regarding spying on US citizens is – and this did not come close. As a Judge he can not plead ignorance of the law.
As the prior head of the FISA court – even more so.
This is banana republic judicial conduct.
Not only should Boasberg be impeached – he should be prosecuted criminally and sued civilly.
While I have enormous problems with his behavior in other cases – their it is just arrogant haughty, politically motivated.
He absolutely should be subject to some form of discipline for that – but that is the responsibility of the Supreme court – not DOJ and mostly not congress.
This particular conduct is over the top and criminal, and he should be punished.
“That’s why Turley is not detailing any of the conduct from Boasberg as criminal.”
Read the article – Boasberg violated the law – criminal or not that is grounds for impeachment.
We can not have judges deciding which laws they will follow and which ones they will not.
Worse still this was part of a process that was not adversarial – that means those whose rights were violated had no ability to appeal his ruling.
That is when the requirements for a judge to follow the law as strictly as possible are highest.
“Getting phone numbers, time, and dates is a very narrow request that meets legal requirements and does not harm congressmen in any meaningful way.”
BZZT Wrong. It is as defined by the constitution a SEARCH, it is a violation of the right to be secure in your person papers and property.
There is no exception in the 5th amendment for little violations of your rights.
Of course these congressmen were harmed – but that is NOT the constitutional standard.
“Because he did nothing wrong. The accusation of misconduct come from assumptions and unfounded allegations. ”
No they come from the black letter law Turley cited and the 5th amendment of the constitution.
Identify the PROBABLE CAUSE that these members of congress committed a crime ? List the specific crime and the evidence against them that constitutes probable cause that they committed a crime ?
The 5th amendment requores probable cause before govenrment can search anyones records.
Here is Carpenter v. United States
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-402
Holding
“The government’s warrantless acquisition of Carpenter’s cell-site records violated his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures. ”
Except that Carpenter was a likely co-conspirator in a bunch of armed robberies the other facts are identical to this case.
No, they are STRONGER
In the carpenter Case one of the defendants was caught dead to rights. The police used his Cell phone records to seach the records for possible co-conspirators.
SCOTUS found that there was not the probable cause necescary to do so.
In the Carpenter case there was a CLEAR crime – armed robbery.
They had a confession from one conspirator who provided his cell to the police.
This is far more “probable cause” than Boasberg had.
“That’s why nothing will happen.”
You MIGHT be right – but I would not bet on it – even democrats in congress are angry about this – and rightfully so.
What is to prevent Trump/Bondi from finding a favorable Federal judge to get records of Schumer, Pelosi, Jeffries ?
What Turley linked to is “2 U.S. Code § 6628 – Treatment of electronic services provided by Sergeant at Arms”
However this data / electronic service is not provided by the Sergeant at Arms, so appears inapplicable.
Further, even if it was, the control is about the data being transmitted, not the metadata of the transmission.
O.T.:
Bill Clinton is already shopping for a 2028 Presidential hopeful to grant him an Epstein Island goer Pardon, so that he does not get lock-up in a conjugal cell with his wife Hillary. As the Epstein Island, The Clinton Foundation, and Comey, Brennen, … et.al investigation inquiries mount pressures on both the Clintons.
At least Bill is trying to stay ahead of the Obamas in preparing for the end game.
Bill Clinton Reveals Which Democrat He Thinks Can Win The White House In 2028
With the Democratic Party still reeling from its defeat in the 2024 elections, there is no shortage of speculation about who might be the party’s best chance for victory in 2028. Now a familiar power broker has stepped forward: Former President Bill Clinton. The 42nd president has reportedly indicated which contender he believes offers Democrats their strongest shot at reclaiming the White House.
By: Tyler Durden ~ Nov 24, 2025
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/bill-clinton-reveals-which-democrat-he-thinks-can-win-white-house-2028
Clinton probably won’t make it to 2028…
“I do not support the calls for Boasberg to be impeached, but his role in this scandal cannot be ignored. He not only enabled this abusive effort but also expressly told these companies not to reveal the demands to anyone.”
Grow a set and endorse the impeachment. You are blinded by your affinity to the legal system. Did he not violate the law?
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
– John Stuart Mill
Stop it. The finest words have no impact on reality. Democracy in America has ceased to exist and words of self-aggrandizement do nothing to address the issues and actions which shame us. Actions TRULY speak louder than words, and in this case the use of actual legal process is needed, NOT JUST SAYING IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AFTER IT HASN’T.
Too many words and noble discourse have destroyed the rule of law in America. Legislative and Executive branches have been reduced to titular travesties while “magistrates” define law, legislation, executive power, and judicial ruling in contemptible tyranny.
Unfortunately, discussions bearing the obfuscational powers of “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” have done nothing more than obstruct actions and remediations, completely destroying democracy in the United States of America.
The rule of law was obliterated nearly 15 years ago and remains a farcical pretension. Every one of these “law-fares” follow the same philosophy, and generally the same “legal” process — punitive assault by artificially empowered tyrants of unlimited power who assassinate chosen opponents’ reputation, electability, freedom, and even lives using dissemination of manufactured gossip through leakage, obstruction, then stalling remediation of punitive reaction through the Statute of Limitations as an insurmountable offense
Intended or not, the US legal system has devolved – and that responsibility lies with those who have been admitted to the bar – regardless of protests of innocence and pretended alignment against “bad stuff” and the voters who have supported it.
In other words – shame on us! Blowing a whistle and “condemning” tyranny is nothing more than self-aggrandizement if action is not proposed and followed – in compliance with the law as it is actually written.
Have no idea how that was superimposed. The Casablanca “shocking” was intended:
“The rule of law was obliterated nearly 15 years ago and remains a farcical pretension.”
– HorrifiedAsWeFillOurPockets
___________________________________
In fact, “the rule of law was obliterated” when “Crazy Abe” Lincoln arbitrarily decided that because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited, rejecting the very essence of the 10th Amendment, a mere 71 years after the American Founders formalized their secession from Great Britain, and unconstitutionally imposed martial law, commenced a war not declared by Congress against a sovereign foreign nation, suspended habeas corpus, smashed printing presses, threw political opponents in prison, acted with negligence in not enforcing existing immigration law, killed one million Americans, etc. Lincoln threw the baby out with the bathwater—he threw the Constitution out with reprehensible slavery. All that was necessary and legal was for Congress to pass legislation making slavery illegal.
In fact, “the rule of law was obliterated” when “Crazy Abe” Lincoln arbitrarily decided that because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited
Mad King George X (so mad he keeps forgetting to log in as “X” who he’s trannied to before anonymously posting his daily/weekly Confederate Kluxxer BullSchiff), hopes normal Americans will forget his Confederate Kluxxer ancestors not only lost the Confederate Democrat Slave State Insurrection War but within a year lost their legal attempted insurrection at SCOTUS. And lost in one of their first attempts at demanding free stuff from the Union’s federal government.
In George’s current commie persona as “X”, he adopts the tactics of his fellow police state fascist disciples of Marxist Theology, Hitler and Stalin. He’s hoping that if he repeats his lies often enough, they will finally be accepted as truth.
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868)
Affirming the perpetual nature of American federalism, and that the USA is an indestructible union FROM WHICH NO STATE CAN UNILATERALLY SECEDE.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/700/
The Union of the States was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to “be perpetual.” And, when these Articles of Confederation were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained “to form a more perfect Union. The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States.
When those states became one of the United States, they entered into an indissoluble relationship. The union between individual states and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of all the States to amend the Constitution.
Sure. That’s why they were afraid to put Jefferson Davis on trial.
“History is written by the victors”