Podcast Summary: Legal AF by MeidasTouch
Episode Title: Judge Lays the Smack Down on Trump over War Powers
Release Date: March 18, 2025
Hosts: Ben Meiselas, Michael Popak, Karen Friedman Agnifilo
Executive Producer: Meidas Media Network

Overview

In this episode of Legal AF by MeidasTouch, hosted by the MeidasTouch Network, the discussion centers on a high-stakes legal confrontation between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary concerning the invocation of war powers. The episode delves into the specifics of a recent hearing where a federal judge reprimanded former President Donald Trump for overstepping executive authority through the misuse of the Alien Enemies Act.

Escalation of the Legal Battle

Michael Popak introduces the episode by outlining the gravity of the situation:

"This may well be the constitutional crisis that we were expecting to have Donald Trump drawing a line in the sand and deciding that this is the thing he's going to use to test the outer boundaries of his power and beyond."
(00:22)

The Trump administration attempted to deport individuals using a secret proclamation invoking war powers, specifically the Alien Enemies Act. This proclamation targeted individuals, including minors, labeling them as gang members and aiming to deport them to El Salvador—a move widely criticized as unconstitutional and in violation of judicial orders.

Judge’s Response and Legal Proceedings

Jeb Boasberg details the judge's actions in response to the administration's defiance:

"That injunction is an injunction, oral, you know, verbal, until it's memorialized."
(04:45)

The Chief Judge of the District Court for D.C., Judge Jeb Boasberg, issued a temporary restraining order to halt the deportations. However, the Trump administration proceeded to deploy planes that defied this order, leading to a contentious hearing. The judge emphasized the authority of the judiciary and the non-negotiable nature of court orders:

"You can't rely on a placeholder minute order placed for two lines on the docket as your injunction."
(11:12)

The administration's attempts to undermine the judge included filing motions to remove him from the case, arguing that his decisions lacked jurisdiction and overstepped executive powers. Boasberg counters these claims by asserting the foundational role of federal judges in interpreting the Constitution and enforcing the rule of law.

Administration’s Defiance and Legal Maneuvering

The Trump administration employed several tactics to resist compliance:

1. Motion to Remove the Judge:
   They filed a two-page letter with the court of appeals, challenging the judge’s authority and seeking his removal, claiming unsubstantiated Article II powers that negate the judge's jurisdiction. Boasberg defends the judge’s qualifications and authority:

   "He was appointed to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the FISA court by Chief Justice Roberts, served there valiantly for five years."
   (06:30)

2. Ignoring Oral Orders:
   The administration argued that the oral orders issued by the judge held no weight until they were documented in a written minute order, a stance Boasberg dismisses as “ridiculous” and a blatant disregard for judicial authority.

3. Classification Claims:
   Deputy Attorney General Abhesik Kambli attempted to withhold information by citing classification, to which the judge responded by highlighting his own security clearance and the need for transparency in legal proceedings:

   "I can't tell you how many times in my career we've ordered the transcript from a hearing so that we fully understood the judge's rulings."
   (11:12)

Implications and Constitutional Concerns

Michael Popak and Jeb Boasberg discuss the broader constitutional implications, questioning the legitimacy of using the Alien Enemies Act without a declared war:

"The Alien Enemies act is not a war power. It is not something that a commander in chief necessarily using his powers implements and there's no war been declared."
(17:45)

They argue that the Trump administration's actions represent a dangerous overreach of executive power, undermining the checks and balances integral to the U.S. Constitution. The discussion highlights the potential for this conflict to escalate into a significant constitutional crisis, with possible involvement from the Supreme Court.

Future Developments and Conclusion

The hosts anticipate further legal actions, including appeals to higher courts and potential Supreme Court intervention:

"The United States Supreme Court involvement as early as the end of this week or beginning of next week. That's as early as that could happen."
(20:00)

Jeb Boasberg concludes by emphasizing the importance of upholding judicial authority and the rule of law, asserting that the Trump administration's defiance will likely be addressed at the highest levels of the judiciary. The episode underscores the critical role of federal judges in maintaining constitutional integrity against executive overreach.

Key Takeaways

• Judicial Authority: The episode underscores the essential role of federal judges in interpreting and enforcing constitutional laws, especially against executive overreach.

• Executive Overreach: The Trump administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act without a declared war is portrayed as a significant breach of constitutional norms.

• Legal Strategy: The administration's attempts to undermine judicial authority through motions to remove judges and classification claims are critically examined.

• Constitutional Crisis Potential: The conflict may escalate into a major constitutional crisis, potentially involving the Supreme Court to resolve disputes over executive and judicial powers.

Notable Quotes

• "This may well be the constitutional crisis... testing the outer boundaries of his power and beyond." – Michael Popak (00:22)

• "You can't rely on a placeholder minute order placed for two lines on the docket as your injunction." – Jeb Boasberg (11:12)

• "The Alien Enemies act is not a war power... there's no war been declared." – Jeb Boasberg (17:45)

This episode of Legal AF by MeidasTouch provides an in-depth analysis of the legal tussle between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary, highlighting significant concerns about executive power, judicial authority, and the potential ramifications for the U.S. constitutional framework.