Up next in 10
'Unimaginable' - What Trump Justice Department Just Did To Activist Judge Sends Shockwaves
Mar 22, 2025
Join this channel to get access to perks:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsMSFwBF-4SWD5msARwYkdw/join
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
hey ladies and gentlemen this is Carmine
0:02
Sabia for Explain
0:04
America And guys what President Donald
0:08
Trump's Justice Department just did well
0:12
it's got some legal experts shaking
0:15
their heads in
0:17
disbelief Before we get started please
0:19
make sure you like comment share and
0:21
subscribe Those little things really
0:23
help us out and they help our channel
0:25
continue to grow And if you're not
0:27
watching us on
0:29
YouTube please visit that address in the
0:31
lower right hand corner It's
0:34
youtube.com/adexplain America and hit
0:36
subscribe absolutely free It really
0:38
helps us out
0:42
So Ellie
0:44
Honig was on CNN yesterday and he he
0:47
used to be a Justice Department
0:49
attorney and he said he was both
0:51
mortified but also
0:54
impressed with how Trump's Department of
0:56
Justice is handling these activist
0:59
judges Basically telling them to pound
1:01
sand Basically telling them "We're not
1:04
going to give you what you're demanding
1:06
You're not entitled to what you're
1:08
demanding You have no reason to get what
1:10
you're demanding You're trying to
1:11
interfere with the executive branch of
1:13
government It's not your responsibility
1:15
These district judges are out of hand If
1:18
if it continues this way I'm going to
1:20
tell you guys something Take a break
1:21
from this for a second from the Ellie
1:23
Honig story Okay and here's the gist by
1:26
the way of the Ellie Honing story He's
1:28
shocked that the Department of Justice
1:30
is standing up to these judges And I
1:32
want you to see that I want you to see
1:34
his reaction to it because it's good And
1:36
I'm going to play that video for you in
1:38
just a second But I want you guys to
1:39
understand what's at stake
1:41
here If the district court judges can
1:44
continue to stop the president this way
1:47
a district court judge can issue a
1:48
nationwide injunction Now by the way you
1:51
have to understand these groups and
1:52
these people that are filing these these
1:54
cases They're doing so in liberal
1:56
districts intentionally It's called
1:57
judge shopping So they get a judge that
2:00
agrees with them And you're going to
2:01
hear from people well the judges even
2:03
agree The judges agree because the
2:05
judges are almost hand selected Okay
2:08
it's not some random judge That's not
2:10
how it works I wish the legal system I
2:13
wish the court system was as neutral as
2:15
we want it to be but it's not It's just
2:18
as political as everything else That
2:21
being said if this continues it will
2:24
destroy the judiciary in this country
2:27
It's that serious It's that serious You
2:31
cannot have there is 670 some odd
2:34
district judges in this country
2:36
essentially continuing to do what
2:38
they're doing You have 670 some odd
2:42
presidents or little mini presidents
2:45
Some guy in a robe who who's a liberal
2:47
attorney who happened to become a judge
2:49
No I don't like that Well you're not the
2:51
you're not the president Over 70 million
2:54
people didn't vote for you Dude this is
2:56
not how this is supposed to work This is
2:58
an abuse of the justice system It can
3:02
erode the courts forever if it's allowed
3:05
to continue Judicial activism has to end
3:08
I don't care if it's Republican or
3:10
Democrat conservative or liberal It
3:13
they're supposed to follow the dang law
3:15
That's it I want you to watch this video
3:18
and let me know what you think in the
3:19
comments Insiders start us off Ellie you
3:22
know when you look back at Judge
3:23
Boseberg's rulings some people have also
3:26
mentioned he's also a pretty close
3:28
friend of you may know him Brett
3:30
Kavanaaugh Trump's um Supreme Court
3:32
justice that he picked They were
3:33
roommates They still go on trips
3:35
together Obviously that doesn't dictate
3:36
how he's going to to rule But it does
3:39
speak to you know the nature of what
3:40
Jeff Zelani was getting at is how do you
3:42
determine which who's a judge you don't
3:44
like is it just because they rule
3:45
against you well that seems to be the
3:47
rule with the Trump administration But
3:48
let's remember this judge has been if
3:51
anything remarkably patient and
3:53
solicitous with Trump's DOJ I mean I've
3:56
been watching what DOJ has been doing
3:58
the way they've been responding to this
3:59
judge over the last 3 days with awe and
4:02
astonishment I mean this is now the
4:04
third consecutive day the judge has said
4:06
"I want specific details from you
4:08
Justice Department." And they have
4:10
responded by saying "We'll give you a
4:12
little bit but no you don't need the
4:13
rest of that We're not giving that to
4:14
you." I'm halfway horrified by this as a
4:17
DOJ alum I'm halfway I guess impressed I
4:19
mean they're they're they're sort of
4:20
really standing up to him today They
4:21
said to this judge "You are beating a
4:23
dead horse." In writing they said that
4:26
to the judge I mean that is unimaginable
4:28
as a DOJ alum I I guess I've fantasized
4:31
about saying that to a judge but I would
4:32
never say it out loud And yet this judge
4:35
continues to give them more time The
4:36
other thing is what's the big ruling
4:38
that the judge has made here that's
4:40
apparently so contrary to the Trump
4:41
administration all he has said is "Let's
4:44
try to pause here so I can take a couple
4:46
days and work through this complicated
4:48
legal issue." He hasn't actually even
4:50
ruled against them yet yet this response
4:52
Yeah it's just temporary He might
4:53
actually agree with them on the
4:55
underlying issues here What did you make
4:57
of Attorney General Pam Bondi saying you
5:00
know coming out here he's asking all
5:02
these questions I mean isn't that how
5:04
this works with the judiciary judges
5:07
like to ask questions It's kind of their
5:08
job Some would say and look I've been in
5:10
front of Judge Boseberg I've argued in
5:11
front of I've had cases in front of him
5:13
last time Is he a radical left he's not
5:15
He's he's a smart thoughtful judge The
5:16
last time he ruled in my favor so he's
5:18
smart He's good But I will say this I
5:20
think what what you know Bonnie is
5:22
saying that he shouldn't be asking these
5:23
questions This gets to the
5:24
administration's fundamental legal point
5:26
here which is simply that federal judges
5:28
don't have a role to play when it comes
5:31
to these types of immigration removals
5:34
I'm not saying that's ultimately the
5:35
correct legal position The Supreme Court
5:37
presumably will sort that out But the
5:39
administration the way they see this is
5:41
this is akin to a federal judge trying
5:42
to micromanage a president in his you
5:45
know putting troops on the battlefield
5:46
or organizing a war fighting a war That
5:48
judges just don't have any role to play
5:50
I think Judge Bozerg certainly sees it
5:52
differently And again the Supreme Court
5:53
ultimately will be arbitrator of
5:55
precisely what role if any federal
5:56
judges have to play in this whole scheme
5:58
Well and to Ellie's point this doesn't
5:59
so much have to do with the actual issue
6:01
here because we heard from Tom Hman
6:03
tonight Um
6:09
[Music]
Courts & Judiciary
Constitutional Law & Civil Rights
Other