Trump says Waltz doesn’t need to apologize over Signal text chain leak: ‘Doing his best’

President Donald Trump defended National Security Advisor Michael Waltz during an ambassador meeting on Monday, as his administration faces fierce backlash over the recent Signal text chain leak.

Waltz, whose staffers had unknowingly added The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal group chat where Secretary of State Pete Hegseth and others discussed sensitive war plans, has come under fire for the blunder. Speaking to a room full of reporters, Trump said he believes Waltz is "doing his best."

"I don't think he should apologize," the president said. "I think he's doing his best. It's equipment and technology that's not perfect."

"And, probably, he won't be using it again, at least not in the very near future," he added.

TRUMP NOMINATES SUSAN MONAREZ TO BECOME THE NEXT CDC DIRECTOR, SAYS AMERICANS 'LOST CONFIDENCE' IN AGENCY

Goldberg was added to the national security discussion, called "Houthi PC Small Group", earlier in March. He was able to learn about attacks against Houthi fighters in Yemen long before the public.

"According to the lengthy Hegseth text, the first detonations in Yemen would be felt two hours hence, at 1:45 p.m. eastern time," Goldberg wrote in his piece about the experience. "So I waited in my car in a supermarket parking lot. If this Signal chat was real, I reasoned, Houthi targets would soon be bombed. At about 1:55, I checked X and searched Yemen. Explosions were then being heard across Sanaa, the capital city."

Though Goldberg's inclusion in the chat did not foil the military's plans, the national security breach has still stunned both supporters and critics of the Trump administration. During the Tuesday meeting, Trump also said that he was in contact with Waltz over whether hackers can break into Signal conversations.

IMPEACHMENT ARTICLES HIT JUDGE WHO ORDERED TRUMP TO STOP DEPORTATION FLIGHTS

"Are people able to break into conversations? And if that's true, we're gonna have to find some other form of device," Trump said. "And I think that's something that we may have to do. Some people like Signal very much, other people probably don't, but we'll look into it."

"Michael, I've asked you to immediately study that and find out if people are able to break into a system," he added.

In response, Waltz assured Trump that he has White House technical experts "looking at" the situation, along with legal teams.

"And of course, we're going to keep everything as secure as possible," the national security official said. "No one in your national security team would ever put anyone in danger. And as you said, we've repeatedly said the attack was phenomenal, and it's ongoing."

Can Congress defund federal courts with key Trump budget process?

As Republicans look for ways to rein in federal judges issuing countless orders to halt the Trump administration's action on immigration in particular, a number of potential avenues for doing so are being considered. 

However, the use of a key budget process that lowers the Senate's threshold to 51 votes to defund certain courts could face significant obstacles.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, House Freedom Caucus policy chair and chair of the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on the Constitution, told Fox News Digital he isn't "for or against" any specific approach to addressing the countrywide injunctions that are throwing a wrench into President Donald Trump's priorities.

CHUCK SCHUMER FACING 'UPHILL FIGHT' AMID LEADERSHIP DOUBTS: 'MATTER OF WHEN, NOT IF'

"We ought to look at [impeachment], we ought to look at jurisdiction-stripping, we ought to look at every option that needs to be addressed about judges that are actively taking steps to try to undermine the presidency," he said.

The Republican added, "I think there are pros and cons of those approaches. I think we need to look at … funding scenarios. Now that takes a little time; you've got to work through either the appropriations, rescissions or reconciliation process, depending on where it's appropriate."

The budget reconciliation process lowers the threshold for Senate passage from 60 votes to 51 out of 100, allowing the party in power to more easily advance its agenda with no opposition party support. However, the provisions must relate to budgetary and other fiscal matters. The House of Representatives already has a simple majority threshold.

The process is being relied on heavily by Republicans, who have a trifecta in Washington, in order to push through Trump agenda items.

BATTLE OF THE CHAMBERS: HOUSE AND SENATE TENSIONS BOIL OVER AS TRUMP BUDGET HANGS IN LIMBO

In the months since Trump took office, his aggressive pace has been somewhat hampered by federal judges across the country issuing numerous orders to halt immigration, waste-cutting and anti-diversity, equity and inclusion actions. 

This has prompted Republicans to call for action against what they consider abusive actions by lower-tier federal judges.  

"I don’t think defunding is a viable option," said Andy McCarthy, a former assistant U.S. attorney and a Fox News contributor. 

"The chief justice would be angry that the district courts were understaffed, and Trump wouldn’t get away with later trying to add the positions back so that he could fill them," he continued.

Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo called potentially defunding the courts that have been causing problems for the administration "a terrible idea."

"It would make no difference anyway; the cases challenging Trump’s executive orders would still be challenged in the courts that exist," he explained. 

This was echoed by former Trump attorney Jim Trusty, who said, "I don’t think defunding an already overworked judicial system would be right or effective."

BIDEN ADMIN'S 'VAST CENSORSHIP ENTERPRISE' WITH HELP OF NGOS SLATED FOR KEY HEARING, LAWMAKER SAYS

Because of the specific guidelines for what can be included in reconciliation bills, legal experts seem to be in agreement that defunding courts wouldn't meet the requirements. 

One such expert told Fox News Digital that not only does the provision need to have a federal fiscal impact, the policy effect cannot outweigh that impact. 

They further noted that the Senate's parliamentarian would be the one to make a judgment on this. 

Trusty said "the solution to judicial activism" is either the appellate courts finding ways to stop the injunctions on appeal or by direct orders, or "Congress develops a nimble response and passes legislation to clarify their intent to let the executive branch act without judicial tethers on various issues."

"The better option would be to explore ways to limit the jurisdiction of the lower courts or to fast-track appeals when they try to issue nationwide injunctions," McCarthy said.

CONGRESS EXPANDED THE EXECUTIVE – ONLY FOR TRUMP TO QUASH MUCH OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE

As for potentially impeaching federal judges, which has been floated by Trump himself, Trusty said it "should still be viewed as a prosecution substitute for office holders who have committed treason or high crimes and misdemeanors; in other words, serious crimes."

"Bad judgment and wrong-headed decisions are not crimes," he noted. 

Neither Trump's White House nor Republican leadership in Congress have indicated plans to pursue the issue through the reconciliation process.

Lawmakers have acknowledged the problem, though, and the House is set to take up legislation to address the judges' actions this week.

Kristi Noem, Scott Turner establish effort to end ‘exploitation of housing programs’ by illegal immigrants

The Trump administration has begun an interagency effort to end what it describes as the "exploitation of housing programs" by illegal aliens.

In a statement published on Monday, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced that it had established the "American Housing Programs for American Citizens" Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The agreement was also signed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). 

The MOU is geared towards ending "the wasteful misappropriation of taxpayer dollars to benefit illegal aliens instead of American citizens," the press release stated.

"As part of this new agreement, HUD will provide a full-time staff member to assist in operations at the Incident Command Center (ICC), establishing an interagency partnership to facilitate data sharing and ensure taxpayer-funded housing programs are not used to harbor or benefit illegal aliens," the release read.

TRUMP NOMINATES SUSAN MONAREZ TO BECOME THE NEXT CDC DIRECTOR, SAYS AMERICANS 'LOST CONFIDENCE' IN AGENCY

The effort comes a month after President Donald Trump signed an executive order (EO) to "ensure taxpayer resources are not used to incentivize or support illegal immigration." The EO, signed on Feb. 19, ordered government departments to identify which federally-funded programs are "providing financial benefits to illegal aliens," and mandated them to "take corrective action."

In a statement about the recent MOU, HUD Secretary Scott Turner referenced the ongoing housing crisis in the U.S. and characterized the issue as "pressing."

IMPEACHMENT ARTICLES HIT JUDGE WHO ORDERED TRUMP TO STOP DEPORTATION FLIGHTS

"This agreement will leverage resources including technology and personnel to ensure American people are the only priority when it comes to public housing," Turner said. "We will continue to work closely with DHS to maximize our resources and put American citizens first."

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem blasted the Biden administration in her statement, accusing the former president of prioritizing illegal aliens "over our own citizens, including by giving illegal aliens taxpayer-funding housing at the expense of Americans."

"The entire government will work together to identify abuse and exploitation of public benefits and make sure those in this country illegally are not receiving federal benefits or other financial incentives to stay illegally," Noem said. "If you are an illegal immigrant, you should leave now. The gravy train is over."

Trump nominates Susan Monarez to become the next CDC director, says Americans ‘lost confidence’ in agency

President Donald Trump has named Susan Monarez as his nominee for the next director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), calling the candidate "a dedicated public servant."

Monarez, who is currently acting director of the CDC, replaces Trump's original nominee for the role, Dr. David Weldon. The Trump administration never gave an official reason why Weldon's nomination was withdrawn earlier this month, but a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that it would have been a "futile effort."

"It became clear that the votes weren't there in the Senate for him to get confirmed," the source explained. "This would have been a futile effort."

In a Truth Social post published on Monday, Trump wrote that Monarez "brings decades of experience championing Innovation, Transparency, and strong Public Health Systems."

DOJ INSISTS EL SALVADOR DEPORTATION FLIGHTS DID NOT VIOLATE COURT ORDER

"She has a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin, and PostDoctoral training in Microbiology and Immunology at Stanford University School of Medicine," the president wrote. "Dr. Monarez understands the importance of protecting our children, our communities, and our future."

Trump also claimed that Americans have "lost confidence" in the CDC, citing "political bias and disastrous mismanagement," as reasons why.

IMPEACHMENT ARTICLES HIT JUDGE WHO ORDERED TRUMP TO STOP DEPORTATION FLIGHTS

"Dr. Monarez will work closely with our GREAT Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert Kennedy Jr," the president continued. "Together, they will prioritize Accountability, High Standards, and Disease Prevention to finally address the Chronic Disease Epidemic and, MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN!"

According to Monarez's CDC biography, she previously worked at the White House in the Office of Science and Technology Policy and on the National Security Council.

"[She led] efforts to enhance the nation's biomedical innovation capabilities, including combating antimicrobial resistance, expanding the use of wearables to promote patient health, ensuring personal health data privacy, and improving pandemic preparedness," the biography states. "She has also held leadership positions at the Department of Homeland Security and has led numerous international cooperative initiatives to promote bilateral and multilateral health innovation research and development."

Fox News Digital's Rachel Wolf and Julia Johnson contributed to this report.

Here’s what happened during Trump’s ninth week in office

President Donald Trump signed more executive orders this week — including one to upend the Department of Education — battled the judicial branch, and spoke to both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. 

On Thursday, Trump announced plans to work with Congress to upend the Department of Education. Closing down an agency requires the approval of Congress, according to the U.S. Constitution. 

"We're not doing well with the world of education in this country, and we haven't for a long time," Trump said Thursday before signing the executive order. 

A White House fact sheet on the executive order said the directive aims to "turn over education to families instead of bureaucracies" and instructs Education Secretary Linda McMahon to "take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return education authority to the States, while continuing to ensure the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely."

Trump said Thursday programs for Pell Grants, student loans for undergraduate students, and others that provide resources for children with special needs would continue to exist, just under different agencies.

"They're going to be preserved in full and redistributed to various other agencies and departments that will take very good care of them," Trump said.

Those in favor of shuttering the agency have pointed to the "Nation’s Report Card," the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) released every two years, released on Jan. 27. The exam tests fourth and eighth grade students and found almost stagnant math scores for eighth graders compared to 2022. Reading scores dropped two points at both grade levels.

As a result, Trump said without evidence that new efforts to upend the Department of Education would allow states like Texas to provide education comparable to countries like Norway, Denmark and Sweden.

"And then you'll have some laggards, and we'll work with them," Trump said. "And we can all tell you who the laggards will be, right now, probably, but let's not get into that."

Here’s also what Trump did this week: 

Trump called for the impeachment of Judge James Boasberg of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in a social media post Tuesday, prompting Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare statement condemning Trump’s remarks.

Trump’s pushback stems from Boasberg issuing an order on Saturday halting the Trump administration from deporting migrants allegedly part of the Tren de Aragua gang under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The law permits deportation of natives and citizens of an enemy nation without a hearing.

The flights carrying the migrants continued to El Salvador, and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Sunday the order had "no lawful basis" since Boasberg issued it after the flights departed from U.S. airspace.

JUDGES BLOCKING TRUMP'S ORDERS ARE ACTING ‘ERRONEOUSLY,' WHITE HOUSE SAYS

In response to Boasberg’s order, Trump said the judge should be impeached. However, Roberts said that "it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision." 

Boasberg’s order is one of multiple injunctions issued against the Trump administration, blocking various executive orders he’s signed since taking office in January. The White House has accused judges of behaving as partisan activists to stop Trump’s agenda. 

"I would like to point out that the judges in this country are acting erroneously," Leavitt said in a Wednesday news briefing. "We have judges who are acting as partisan activists from the bench."

Trump also announced that Boeing had won out among defense companies for a contract to build the Air Force’s next-generation fighter jet, known as the F-47. 

"I’m thrilled to announce that at my direction the United States Air Force is moving forward with the world’s first sixth-generation fighter jet," Trump said Friday in the Oval Office at the White House. "Nothing in the world comes even close to it, and it’ll be called the ‘F-47,’ the generals picked that title." 

BOEING TO BUILD NEXT-GEN ‘F-47’ US FIGHTER JET, TRUMP ANNOUNCES

The Next Generation Air Defense initiative that the Biden administration put on the back burner will oversee the effort. The Trump administration revived the program, a move that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said Friday "sends a very direct, clear message to our allies that we're not going anywhere, and to our enemies that we will be able to project power around the globe." 

An experimental version of the jet has been covertly flying for "years," according to Trump. 

"The F-47 will be the most advanced, most capable, most lethal aircraft ever built," Trump said. 

Trump also spoke with both Putin and Zelenskyy this week over the phone, amid ongoing efforts to end the war in Ukraine. 

Following the calls, both Russia and Ukraine agreed to a limited ceasefire against energy. The next step is for respective teams to conduct meetings to navigate how to reach a full ceasefire, according to the White House. 

"Technical teams will meet in Saudi Arabia in the coming days to discuss broadening the ceasefire to the Black Sea on the way to a full ceasefire," the White House said in a statement Thursday. "They agreed this could be the first step toward the full end of the war and ensuring security. President Zelenskyy was grateful for the President’s leadership in this effort and reiterated his willingness to adopt a full ceasefire."

The Associated Press and Fox News’ Rachel Wolf contributed to this report. 

Biden’s former spokesman slams Trump and GOP ‘colluding to impeach’ judges

FIRST ON FOX: A top former spokesperson for former President Joe Biden is blasting President Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress for proposing potential judicial impeachments, as the administration hits an array of court-imposed obstacles in implementing its agenda. 

Former White House spokesperson Andrew Bates now advises a group known as Unlikely Allies, which says it is working to create "cross-partisan support for the needs and interests of all Americans."

"Radical, corrupt attacks on judges are putting our Constitution and the freedom of every single American in danger from government overreach," Bates told Fox News Digital on the group's behalf. "For the first time in history, our president and members of his party in Congress are colluding to impeach any federal judge who stops the most powerful person in the world from breaking the law."

DEM SENATOR ON SCHUMER FUTURE: 'IMPORTANT' TO KNOW 'WHEN IT'S TIME TO GO'

"The President has also called for making dissent illegal, which would trample the 1st Amendment and threaten the fundamental right of any American to disagree with his agenda — whether it’s cutting taxes for the rich or raising the prices he falsely promised to lower," he continued. 

According to the group, Unlikely Allies "is made up of everyday citizens, families, communities, and organizations who are committed to solving our toughest problems, together."

SCOOP: BILL PREVENTING ACTIVIST JUDGES FROM BLOCKING TRUMP'S AGENDA BACKED BY WHITE HOUSE

"Driven by the values that unite us, our goal is to create unified, cross-partisan support for the needs and interests of all Americans. This isn’t about left or right, Republican or Democrat — it’s about American values and holding our government accountable," a description of the organization read. 

The White House responded to Bates' statement, with Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly telling Fox News Digital, "Biden communications alum Andrew Bates has no credibility after lying to the world about Biden’s cognitive decline. Just like these judges, Bates is a left-wing activist masquerading as a nonpartisan as he works to destroy the separation of powers and subvert the will of the American people." 

The dispute comes as federal judges across the country continue to impose restrictions on Trump actions until further review and legal determinations. 

Recently, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg granted an emergency order to temporarily halt the administration's deportation flights of illegal immigrants.

SPEAKER JOHNSON SAYS GOP LOOKING AT 'ALL AVAILABLE OPTIONS' TO ADDRESS 'ACTIVIST JUDGES' OPPOSING TRUMP

The judge granted the order to review the 1798 wartime-era Alien Enemies Act being invoked by the administration in order to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals and alleged members of the violent gang Tren de Aragua.

This only further angered the president, who appeared to call for Boasberg's impeachment. "This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!" he said on Truth Social.

DEM SENATOR REFUSES TO ADDRESS RELATIONSHIP WITH FOUNDER OF SOROS-FUNDED 'PROPAGANDA' NEWS NETWORK

Republicans in general have appeared to scrutinize the ability of federal district judges to make blanket nationwide orders in recent days. 

"Federal judges aren’t there to replace presidential policy choices," wrote Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, on X. "Nor is it their job to neuter presidents by delaying presidential decisions." 

"Their job is to resolve disputes about what the law says," he continued. 

Lee also said he is working on a bill to address the issue. 

In the House, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., has a measure that would prevent federal judges from issuing nationwide injunctions. Multiple sources told Fox News Digital that Trump himself has shown interest in Issa's bill. Top White House aides shared as much with senior Capitol Hill staff this week, explaining that "the president wants this."

Speaker Johnson says GOP looking at ‘all available options’ to address ‘activist judges’ opposing Trump

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Republicans in the lower chamber are reviewing tools available to take on "activist judges" as President Donald Trump sees resistance from the judiciary in implementing his agenda. 

"Activist judges with political agendas pose a significant threat to the rule of law, equal justice, and the separation of powers. The Speaker looks forward to working with the Judiciary Committee as they review all available options under the Constitution to address this urgent matter," a spokesperson for Johnson's office told Fox News Digital in a statement. 

WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP'S DEPORTATION EFFORTS?

News that the House is considering possible actions to rein in the federal judiciary comes after the latest Trump restriction, wherein U.S. District Judge James Boasberg granted an emergency order to temporarily halt the administration's deportation flights of illegal immigrants.

The judge granted the order to review the 1798 wartime-era Alien Enemies Act being invoked by the administration in order to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals and alleged members of the violent gang Tren de Aragua.

FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TO PAY ‘UNLAWFULLY’ RESTRICTED USAID FUNDS

Trump appeared to call for Boasberg's impeachment after the order. "This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!" he remarked in a post to Truth Social. 

HERE'S WHY DOZENS OF LAWSUITS SEEKING TO QUASH TRUMP'S EARLY ACTIONS AS PRESIDENT ARE FAILING

In a separate post, Trump said, "If a President doesn’t have the right to throw murderers, and other criminals, out of our Country because a Radical Left Lunatic Judge wants to assume the role of President, then our Country is in very big trouble, and destined to fail!"

JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMIN FROM TARGETING DEMOCRATIC LAW FIRM AFTER ATTORNEYS WARN OF FIRM'S DEMISE

Republicans have continued to criticize the flow of temporary restraining orders against Trump's administration from judges across the country. 

Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy and Homeland Security advisor, wrote on X on Thursday, "Under what theory of the Constitution does a single Marxist judge in San Francisco have the same executive power as the Commander-in-Chief elected by the whole nation to lead the executive branch? No such theory exists. It is merely naked judicial tyranny."

As the House explores options to address the issue, the Senate is also expected to investigate. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the subject in the coming weeks. 

Judges blocking Trump’s executive orders are acting ‘erroneously,’ White House says

The judicial branch has been behaving "erroneously," according to White House press secretary, after several judges have blocked various executive orders from President Donald Trump. 

"I would like to point out that the judges in this country are acting erroneously," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a Wednesday news briefing. "We have judges who are acting as partisan activists from the bench."

On Saturday, Judge James Boasberg with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued an order halting the Trump administration from deporting migrants allegedly part of the Tren de Aragua gang under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The law permits deportation of natives and citizens of an enemy nation without a hearing.

However, flights carrying the migrants continued to El Salvador, and Leavitt said Sunday the order had "no lawful basis" since Boasberg issued it after the flights departed from U.S. airspace.

THESE ARE THE JUDGES GOING TOE TO TOE AGAINST TRUMP'S AGENDA 

Meanwhile, Trump called for Boasberg’s impeachment in a social media post Tuesday, prompting Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare statement condemning Trump’s remarks. 

Specifically, Roberts said that "it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision" for more than two centuries." 

In response, Leavitt said Wednesday that the Supreme Court needs to "reign in" judges who are behaving as "partisan activists" and are "undermining" the judicial branch, while also asserting that Trump does respect Robert. 

Efforts to oust Boasberg have also been launched in Congress. For example, Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, unveiled an impeachment resolution against Boasberg Tuesday, claiming that Boasberg was "guilty of high crimes" in a post on social media. 

WHITE HOUSE BLASTS JUDGE FOR ATTEMPTING TO HALT DEPORTATION FLIGHTS TO EL SALVADOR: ‘NO LAWFUL BASIS’

"It's incredibly apparent that there is a concerted effort by the far left to judge shop, to pick judges who are clearly acting as partisan activists from the bench in an attempt to derail this president's agenda," Leavitt said. "We will not allow that to happen." 

Leavitt said that while flights to deport illegal immigrants to El Salvador are currently not scheduled, the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign will continue as litigation continues on this case. 

"We don't have any flights planned specifically, but we will continue with the mass deportations," Leavitt said. "And I would just like to point out that the judge in this case is essentially trying to say that the President doesn't have the executive authority to deport foreign terrorists…That is an egregious abuse of the bench." 

Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report. 

Trump DOJ hammers judge’s ‘digressive micromanagement,’ seeks more time to answer 5 questions

The Justice Department accused a federal judge of "digressive micromanagement" on Wednesday in relation to a case involving deportation flights that sent Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador over the weekend.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered the Justice Department to submit answers to five questions after it insisted Tuesday that the flights did not violate a court order. Boasberg granted an emergency order Saturday to temporarily block the flights from taking place for 14 days while his court considered the legality of using the 1798 wartime-era Alien Enemies Act to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals and alleged members of the violent gang Tren de Aragua. 

"The Court has now spent more time trying to ferret out information about the Government’s flight schedules and relations with foreign countries than it did in investigating the facts before certifying the class action in this case," read a filing Wednesday that was co-signed by Attorney General Pamela Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and others. "That observation reflects how upside-down this case has become, as digressive micromanagement has outweighed consideration of the case’s legal issues." 

"The distraction of the specific facts surrounding the movements of an airplane has derailed this case long enough and should end until the Circuit Court has had a chance to weigh in. The Government respects this Court and has complied with its request to present the Government’s position on the legality of the Court’s [Temporary Restraining Order] and the Government’s compliance with that TRO," they wrote. 

DOJ INSISTS EL SALVADOR DEPORTATION FLIGHTS DID NOT VIOLATE COURT ORDER

Boasberg ordered the Justice Department on Tuesday to answer five questions, submitting declarations to him under seal by noon on Wednesday: "1) What time did the plane take off from U.S. soil and from where? 2) What time did it leave U.S. airspace? 3) What time did it land in which foreign country (including if it made more than one stop)? 4) What time were individuals subject solely to the Proclamation transferred out of U.S. custody? and 5) How many people were aboard solely on the basis of the Proclamation?" 

However, the Justice Department said in their filing today that "Defendants are currently evaluating whether to invoke the state secrets privilege as to portions of the information sought by this Court’s order." 

"Whether and how to invoke that privilege involves both weighty considerations and specific procedures that are not amenable to the 21-hour turnaround period currently provided by this Court’s order," it continued. 

"The underlying premise of these orders, including the most recent one requiring the production of these facts ex parte today at noon, is that the Judicial Branch is superior to the Executive Branch, particularly on non-legal matters involving foreign affairs and national security. The Government disagrees. The two branches are coequal, and the Court’s continued intrusions into the prerogatives of the Executive Branch, especially on a non-legal and factually irrelevant matter, should end," the Justice Department added.

It also said "disclosure of the information sought could implicate the affairs of United States allies and their cooperation with the United States Government in fighting terrorist organizations" and "such disclosure would unquestionably create serious repercussions for the Executive Branch’s ability to conduct foreign affairs." 

IMPEACHMENT ARTICLES HIT JUDGE WHO ORDERED TRUMP TO STOP DEPORTATION FLIGHTS

"What began as a dispute between litigants over the President’s authority to protect the national security and manage the foreign relations of the United States pursuant to both a longstanding Congressional authorization and the President’s core constitutional authorities has devolved into a picayune dispute over the micromanagement of immaterial factfinding," the Justice Department declared. 

Boasberg responded to the Justice Department Wednesday by giving it another day to answer his five questions "or to invoke the state-secrets doctrine and explain the basis for such invocation," according to court filings.

"Mere hours before their filing deadline and characterizing the Court’s proceedings as ‘a picayune dispute over the micromanagement of immaterial factfinding,’ Defendants seek to stay the Court’s Order requiring them to produce in camera particular information," Boasberg wrote. "Although their grounds for such request at first blush are not persuasive, the Court will extend the deadline for one more day."

"The Court seeks this information, not as a ‘micromanaged and unnecessary judicial fishing expedition,’ but to determine if the Government deliberately flouted its Orders issued on March 15, 2025, and, if so, what the consequences should be," Boasberg added.

TRUMP CALLS FOR JUDGE IN DEPORTATION LEGAL BATTLE TO BE IMPEACHED

In granting the emergency order Saturday, Boasberg sided with the plaintiffs – Democracy Forward and the ACLU – who had argued that the deportations would likely pose imminent and "irreparable" harm to the migrants under the time proposed.  

Boasberg also ordered the Trump administration on Saturday to immediately halt any planned deportations and to notify their clients that "any plane containing these folks that is going to take off or is in the air needs to be returned to the United States," he said. 

However, the decision apparently came too late to stop two planes filled with more than 200 migrants who were deported to El Salvador.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News in an interview that a plane carrying hundreds of migrants, including more than 130 persons removed under the Alien Enemies Act, had already "left U.S. airspace" by the time the order was handed down. 

Fox News' Breanne Deppisch and David Spunt contributed to this report.

Federal judge blocks Trump’s transgender military executive order

A federal judge appointed by former President Joe Biden has blocked President Donald Trump's executive order banning transgender people from serving in the U.S. military. 

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes in Washington, D.C., issued a preliminary injunction barring the Pentagon from enforcing Trump's order, which asserted "expressing a false ‘gender identity’ divergent from an individual’s sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service." The order, issued Jan. 27, instructed the Department of Defense (DOD) to update its medical standards for military service and pronoun policies, stating that "beyond the hormonal and surgical medical interventions involved, adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one's personal life." 

Reyes said that the executive order likely poses constitutional rights violations. 

"The court knows that this opinion will lead to heated public debate and appeals. In a healthy democracy, both are positive outcomes," Reyes wrote, delaying her order until Friday morning to allow time for the Trump administration to appeal. "We should all agree, however, that every person who has answered the call to serve deserves our gratitude and respect."

VA RESCINDS 2018 DIRECTIVE ON TRANSGENDER TREATMENTS, ALIGNING WITH TRUMP 'TWO SEXES' EO

Transgender individuals were considered unfit for U.S. military service until the DOD changed its policy during former President Barack Obama's second term. 

In her 79-page ruling, Reyes in part cites Lin-Manuel Miranda's musical "Hamilton" to justify blocking the ban on transgender troops. 

"Women were ‘included in the sequel’ when passage of the Nineteenth Amendment granted them the right to vote in 1920," Reyes wrote in the footnotes, adding, "That right is one of the many that thousands of transgender persons serve to protect."

READ THE JUDGE'S ORDER – APP USERS, CLICK HERE:

Reyes said plaintiffs "face a violation of their constitutional rights, which constitutes irreparable harm." 

"Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender servicemembers have sacrificed – some risking their lives – to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the Military Ban seeks to deny them," the judge wrote, adding that the defendants, on the other hand, "have not shown they will be burdened by continuing the status quo pending this litigation, and avoiding constitutional violations is always in the public interest." 

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller condemned Reyes' ruling on X, writing, "District court judges have now decided they are in command of the Armed Forces…is there no end to this madness?" 

Reyes was the second judge of the day to rule against the Trump administration. Trump called for impeaching a third judge who temporarily blocked deportation flights, drawing a rare rebuke from Chief Justice John Roberts.

TRANSGENDER SAILORS, MARINES OFFERED BENEFITS TO VOLUNTARILY LEAVE SERVICE OR FACE BEING KICKED OUT

"Unelected rogue judges are trying to steal years of time from a 4 year term. It’s the most egregious theft one can imagine: robbing the vote and voice of the American People," Miller wrote in another X post. 

In response to Trump's executive order, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a policy on Feb. 26 that presumptively disqualifies people with gender dysphoria from military service. The policy says, "a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service."

Plaintiffs’ attorneys contend Trump’s order violates transgender people’s rights to equal protection under the Fifth Amendment.

Government lawyers argue that military officials have broad discretion to decide how to assign and deploy service members without judicial interference.

Reyes said she did not take lightly her decision to issue an injunction blocking Trump’s order, noting that "Judicial overreach is no less pernicious than executive overreach." However, she said, it was also the responsibility of each branch of government to provide checks and balances for the others, and the court "therefore must act to uphold the equal protection rights that the military defends every day."

Thousands of transgender people serve in the military, but they represent less than 1% of the total number of active-duty service members, according to The Associated Press. 

In 2016, a DOD policy permitted transgender people to serve openly in the military. During Trump’s first term, he issued a directive to ban transgender service members. The Supreme Court allowed the ban to take effect. 

Biden, a Democrat who served as Obama's vice president, scrapped it when he took office.

Six service members and two people wanting to enlist in the military sued the government in January over Trump’s executive order. About a dozen others, including nine people on active duty, have since joined the lawsuit. Their attorneys, from the National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLAD Law, said transgender troops "seek nothing more than the opportunity to continue dedicating their lives to defending the Nation."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.