Posted originally on CTH on April 16, 2025 | Sundance

It’s not the first part of the 46-page ruling [SEE HERE] by Judge James Boasberg, threatening to hold President Trump and Main Justice in criminal contempt of court, that presents the biggest problem; it’s the second part where Boasberg is threatening to appoint an independent Judicial Branch prosecutor against the DOJ and Trump that makes a constitutional crisis tilt toward a near civil war between the branches.

Outlining his determination that President Trump defied a court order, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg states, “the Court ultimately determines that the Government’s actions on that day demonstrate a willful disregard for its Order, sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt.”

As noted by Politico, within the ruling Boasberg goes on to say:

…”if the administration doesn’t rectify the issue, the judge said he may require administration officials to testify under oath so that he can identify the specific individuals responsible for violating his order. He would then request that those individuals be prosecuted.

The judge signaled he could appoint an outside lawyer to prosecute the contempt case if the Justice Department declines to do so.” (link)

I think we all know the very select group of “beach friend” people whom Boasberg would lean toward in appointing someone to prosecute Pam Bondi and DOJ officials representing President Trump.

High on the list of possible judicial branch appointments, who would be subject to review by the authority of Boasberg himself, would be his prior friendship with a previous appointee, Mary McCord.  Or possibly Andrew Weissmann, Barry Berke, Norm Eisen, David Laufman or any other credentialed member of the Lawfare alliance.

The ruling somewhat reminds me of a prior situation where federal judge Andrew Hanen found the Obama DOJ also in contempt of a court order regarding the status of the “Dreamers” and the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) cases. {Background Here}  However, unlike Boasberg, Hanen only demanded a DOJ corrective action plan.

Lawfare operatives in robes and out of robes are willing to create a constitutional crisis, because that’s how the Lawfare operatives operate when their grip on power is threatened.