Republican lawmakers are expressing strong criticism toward U.S. District Judge James Boasberg following his approval of subpoenas and gag orders in former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into President Donald Trump. Senators Ted Cruz and Marsha Blackburn have branded Boasberg an “activist” judge, with Cruz even suggesting impeachment. He described Boasberg’s actions as if he were “printing these things out like the placemats at Denny’s.”
The subpoenas in question pertain to phone records of 10 senators and one House lawmaker, alongside gag orders that restrict Verizon and AT&T from informing these lawmakers about the subpoenas. The timing and content of these orders have raised alarms among the targeted senators, who perceive this investigation as a severe overreach. Cruz has labeled the situation “worse than Watergate,” while Blackburn echoed accusations of judicial overreach by calling Boasberg an “activist” judge.
However, a closer examination of court rules indicates that Boasberg’s actions may not be as scandalous as some lawmakers suggest. According to the local rules of the federal court system in Washington, D.C., it is a duty of the chief judge to handle matters before the grand jury, which includes issuing subpoenas and gag orders. Boasberg signed these documents in May 2023, only two months into his role as chief judge. Yet, it’s unclear whether Senators Cruz or Blackburn were aware of this duty when they vocalized their discontent, and they did not respond to requests for comment regarding their statements.
Boasberg’s role in these proceedings is not new. In June 2023, he highlighted his responsibility in managing similar matters for the special counsel probe when he partially granted a request from media outlets to unseal documents connected to former Vice President Mike Pence’s testimony.
Additionally, Boasberg’s involvement stems from a recent case where he blocked Trump’s use of a 1798 law to deport Venezuelan nationals. This ruling has drawn the ire of Trump supporters and put Boasberg firmly in the spotlight.
Judge Boasberg holds impressive academic credentials, having graduated from Yale and Oxford, and he has a long history in the legal field. His career includes positions as a federal prosecutor and a judge on the D.C. Superior Court. Notably, his nomination to the federal bench in 2011 received overwhelming bipartisan support—a 96-0 vote in the Senate.
Regarding the investigation led by Jack Smith, the subpoenas causing unrest among Republicans pertain to a brief period surrounding the January 6 Capitol riot. Although the subpoenas do not include the content of calls or messages—an aspect requiring a warrant—they do request detailed records about inbound and outbound communications.
As scrutiny around Boasberg escalates, it is vital to consider the implications of his judicial decisions. His experience and background indicate he follows the law as outlined, but the criticism reflects a growing partisan divide over the workings of the justice system and its engagement with political figures. The intense reactions from Republican senators suggest that the situation has wider ramifications, exposing rifts not just in the courtroom but also in the political arena.
"*" indicates required fields
