Conservatives were incensed after it was revealed that Judge James Boasburg, who became infamous for attempting to block President Trump from deporting Venezuelan gangsters using the Alien Enemies Act, had been assigned to preside over the “Signal-Gate” case. When the story made its way to social media, users were quick to decry the decision as “rigged,” and to blast the judge’s liberal bias.
For context, “Signal Gate” is the popular name for an alleged scandal where several high-ranking U.S. national security officials, including members of the Trump administration, reportedly used the Signal messaging app to discuss sensitive military plans, including the recent airstrikes on the Houthi Rebels in Yemen.
Judge Boasberg has been a lightning rod for controversy since he usurped presidential authority to block Trump’s mass deportation agenda. After that highly irregular ruling, internet sleuths dug into his past and discovered several concerning scandals, including his daughter’s employment at a pro-illegal immigration NGO, which provided legal counsel to members of MS-13 and Tren de Aragua.
In any case, on March 26, 2025, conservative insider Nick Sotor posted the news on X. He said, “
WTF?! Judge Boasberg, the activist judge BLOCKING Trump from deporting violent gang members, intentionally DELAYED the release of Hillary Clinton’s emails until after the 2016 election. He’s also now “coincidentally” presiding over the Signal case. This is RIGGED! How do people not see that?”
In the comments under his post, social media users condemned the judge for his blatant overreach. Prominent conservative commentator Tom Renz said, “The courts are NOT following the law. The appearance of impropriety is the foundation for credibility in our justice system, and it is being abjectly ignored. The courts continually interpret 28 USC 455 more broadly so they can cover for biased judges but there are limits and I think Boasberg is a case study in crossing the line. If the judges don’t follow the law, then how are they in a position to tell us to?”
Other notable Republicans, such as Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, blasted Judge Boasberg. He said, “You’re right, it’s supposed to be random. Supposed to be random, but Judge Boasberg could recuse himself from this case … if there’s a preceded bias, a potential for bias, if there’s a conflict. Well I think there’s a lot of people who think there’s a bias.”
Building on his previous point, Rep. Jordan slammed Boasberg’s previous involvement in anti-Trump witch-hunts. He said, “This is the guy who said, ‘turn the flight around, bring all the bad guys, the hardened criminals who were here illegally who did terrible things, bring those folks back to America.’ This is the judge who was there on the FISA [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] court when they issued the warrants to spy on President Trump’s campaign eight years ago.”
"*" indicates required fields
Concluding his statement with confident arguments, Jim Jordan traced a history of Boasberg’s biased rulings. He added, “So, there’s a history there and yet no, no recusal, he’s going to get the case. They had that lawsuit ready to go, go figure.”
Watch Rep. Andy Biggs savage Judge Boasberg here:
Featured image from embedded video