Legal AF – Furious GOP Judge Excoriates Trump and Blocks Attack

Episode Date: February 12, 2026
Host: Michael Popok (MeidasTouch Network)
Special Context: Emergency coverage of Chief Judge Jeb Boasberg’s order excoriating DOJ and the Trump administration on due process for removed migrants.

Episode Overview

This episode provides a rapid-response analysis of a landmark legal order by Chief Judge Jeb Boasberg of the D.C. District Court. The case centers on the Department of Justice’s handling of 137 migrants allegedly deported as members of a terrorist group, the escalating conflict between Trump administration tactics and judicial oversight, and the broader implications for rule of law and due process in America. Host Michael Popok breaks down the judicial rebuke, the underlying legal precedents, and what’s likely to happen next in a high-stakes struggle between federal courts and executive action.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Background of the Case

• The case involves 137 migrants, allegedly accused by the government of being part of Trena Aragua (a narco-terrorist group).
• The ACLU brought the case after these individuals were deported to El Salvador, then to Venezuela, in apparent defiance of court orders.

2. Judge Boasberg’s Strong Rebuke of DOJ & Trump Administration

• Boasberg issued a sharply worded order, directly criticizing the DOJ’s refusal to offer any solution or redress for rights violations:

  “You told me to go pound sand about giving 137 people ... due process rights and ... I choose a different path.”
  —Michael Popok, summarizing Boasberg ([01:59])

• Judge accuses government of trying to evade court jurisdiction by moving migrants abroad.

3. Legal Precedent: The Abrego Garcia Case

• The Supreme Court previously supported a district judge’s order (involving Abrego Garcia) requiring the return of a deported migrant for due process hearings.
• This set a binding precedent, directly influencing Boasberg’s order:

  “The Abrego Garcia case is ringing in the ears of Chief Judge Boasberg. … I’ve got to follow the [precedent], tell me how I can’t follow that.”
  —Michael Popok ([03:25])

4. Plaintiffs’ (ACLU’s) Reasonable Demands

• Plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU, only ask for hearings and a chance to return to the U.S. for due process—even at the cost of being in custody.
• Judge praises ACLU and the deportees for their reasonable, measured approach:

  “Plaintiffs are being reasonable. You are not being reasonable.”
  —Michael Popok, paraphrasing Boasberg ([04:45])

5. Government’s Stonewalling – And the Court’s Clarity

• DOJ offered no viable solution, insisting they couldn’t return the migrants or offer hearings, essentially telling the court “go pound sand.”
• Boasberg refuses to accept this, calls the DOJ’s position a “solutionless mire”:

  “The court refuses to let them languish in [the] solutionless mire that the defendants propose.”
  —Judge Boasberg ([06:35])

6. Court’s Direct Orders

• Plaintiffs must provide updated information on plaintiffs’ locations and intentions.
• Government is ordered to return passports/travel documents and file plans by March 13 for transporting any plaintiff.
• Exception for remote hearings for those unable or unwilling to return.

7. Anticipated Next Steps

• The government is expected to appeal to the D.C. Circuit.
• Broader significance for judicial independence—Boasberg has faced repeated attacks from the Trump administration, including failed ethics charges.

Memorable Quotes & Moments

• Michael Popok delivers the heart of Boasberg’s order:

  “Federal judge order beats go pound sand. Rock, paper, scissors.” ([02:19])

• On the human cost and courage of migrants:

  “They would rather be in custody in the immigration world of the United States than to be free in Venezuela or third countries. That’s how much they are devoted to their cause.” ([02:40])

• On the significance of judicial pushback:

  “Boasberg is right. The Trump administration has gone after him time and time again … but he is fighting for democracy. He is fighting for the rule of law.” ([09:23])

Timeline of Important Segments

• [01:59] – Michael Popok introduces breaking news and summarizes Boasberg's fiery order.
• [03:25] – Explains legal precedent: the Abrego Garcia case.
• [04:45] – Focuses on the ACLU’s role and the judge’s praise for their reasonable approach.
• [06:35] – Key passages from Boasberg’s order on government wrongdoing and the requirement to provide remedies.
• [08:00] – Summarizes the court’s directives and the likely next steps.
• [09:23] – Reflections on Boasberg’s track record defending democracy and the legal system.

Final Notes

• The episode provides both insight into a high-stakes legal battle and a broader commentary on the resilience of the judicial system.
• Host maintains an urgent and impassioned tone, in keeping with the gravity of the developments.
• Listeners are encouraged to follow up with full court documents and ongoing analysis on the Legal AF Substack.