Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett exposed the Democrats for ‘judge-shopping’ to block President Donald Trump’s immigration policies. Since Trump assumed office this year, Democrat-appointed judges have issued universal injunctions that exceed their authority, violate the Constitution’s separation of powers, and are driven by Trump Derangement Syndrome.
For context, judge-shopping involves filing lawsuits in districts with sympathetic judges to halt the president’s policies nationwide. Some critics have argued that this practice undermines the president’s executive power.
Boasberg’s overreach is exactly what Gregg Jarrett explained in a March 23, 2025, appearance on Fox News, where he explained to Brian Kilmeade exactly how dire the situation is. He said, ” Well, the district court judge, Brian, whose name is Boesberg, set a court hearing for tomorrow, but the higher appellate court has a hearing today to decide whether to toss out the judge’s temporary restraining order on the deportations.”
Jarrett explained just how illegal those moves were. He added, “Boesberg’s restraining order is … defying the Supreme Court, which reviewed Harry Truman’s use of the Alien Enemies Act after World War II ended. And the high court said that not only is the act constitutional under the law of the land, but it is not subject to judicial review by any judge.”
The legal expert says that this law gives the president sweeping powers. He stated, “So when presidents invoke it, no judge, no court can ever intervene, not even the Supreme Court, because Congress gave the president the exclusive power that is purely his to make decisions on national security and foreign policy.”
According to Jarrett, the judge has only one course of legal action. He said, “Well, Boesberg the judge, Brian, as a lower court judge has to follow the ruling of the highest court, the Supreme Court, and butt out. And yet he is brazenly ignoring Supreme Court precedent.”
Brian Kilmeade interjected with a question, looking for the solution to this quandary. He replied, “So, Greg, what is the answer here? The appellate court you were just telling me in the break is not necessarily going to be friendly to the Trump administration…they’ll keep moving up the entire case, right?”
"*" indicates required fields
Watch the clip here:
Jarrett answered with what he thought was the likely path of action. The legal expert explained, “Yeah, I think so. This is, again, strictly a TRO hearing today in the appellate court, temporary restraining order. Although I suspect they may start talking about other things, like whether this judge exceeded his authority on other grounds, which I think he has. It’s not a friendly court. It’s an uphill battle for the Department of Justice on behalf of President Trump.”
He concluded his remarks by planning out how the DOJ could fight this overreach. He said, “So if they uphold the TRO, it goes back to the trial court judge. We see what he does. And then on the merits, it’ll be appealed by the Department of Justice, again, going to higher and higher courts. Eventually, I think, to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
Featured image from embedded video