Fox News' Mark Levin went off on a fiery tirade Wednesday night, taking direct aim at Chief Justice John Roberts after the top judge issued a rare statement pushing back against former President Donald Trump’s call to impeach a federal judge. Levin, a constitutional scholar and conservative commentator, didn’t hold back, calling on Roberts to "grow a pair" during an appearance on Fox News with host Martha MacCallum.
Levin’s heated remarks stemmed from Roberts' response to Trump’s public criticism of U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg. The judge had recently ruled against the administration’s efforts to deport hundreds of immigrants allegedly linked to Venezuelan gangs. Despite the ruling, flights carrying these immigrants were still carried out, intensifying the ongoing legal and political battle over immigration policy.
Levin’s Bold Challenge to Roberts
Levin wasted no time in blasting what he called a “judicial oligarchy” of unelected federal judges who he believes have overstepped their authority, particularly on issues like border security and immigration. He questioned how hundreds of federal judges, who were never elected by the people, have the power to challenge and overturn decisions made by the president of the United States.
“This is exactly what Locke, Montesquieu, Jefferson, and Madison warned about,” Levin exclaimed, referencing some of history’s greatest political thinkers. “When you have a combination of branches rather than separation of branches... you have a tyranny.”
A Judiciary Battle Over Immigration
Judge Boasberg’s decision to halt the deportation order was a major blow to the Trump administration’s immigration policy, which sought to take a hardline approach toward suspected gang members from Venezuela. However, administration officials provided little concrete evidence linking the individuals in question to gang activity. The case quickly became a flashpoint in the ongoing struggle between the executive and judicial branches.
The White House, not one to back down from a legal fight, escalated its criticism, with press secretary Karoline Leavitt going so far as to label Boasberg a “Democratic activist.” This accusation was particularly striking given that the judge has previously ruled in favor of Trump in certain cases, highlighting the complexity of the legal battles that have come to define modern politics.
The Supreme Court’s Role in the Dispute
MacCallum, moderating the conversation, turned the discussion toward Roberts’ stance on the matter, questioning Levin about what the Supreme Court should do in response to these legal clashes. Levin, in his usual no-nonsense manner, dismissed Roberts' comments and insisted that the Chief Justice should focus on ensuring the judiciary remains neutral and functions as intended.
“Do your job, Chief Justice of the United States,” Levin thundered. “Don’t get into the political fight. Fix it.” He warned that if Roberts and the Supreme Court fail to step in and rein in what he sees as judicial overreach, the U.S. could face serious constitutional consequences.
The Bigger Picture: Judicial Power vs. Presidential Authority
This latest spat between the judiciary and the executive branch is just one chapter in a much larger struggle over power and authority in the American government. Trump’s presidency was marked by frequent clashes with the courts, particularly on issues like immigration, border security, and foreign aid distribution. Just recently, a federal judge ruled that the Trump administration must release $2 billion in frozen foreign aid to humanitarian groups—a decision that further enraged conservatives like Levin, who see such rulings as judicial activism.
Levin passionately argued that unchecked judicial power threatens the constitutional balance. He pointed out that for over 200 years, judicial disagreements have been resolved through the appellate process, yet today’s landscape is far more contentious. With courts increasingly weighing in on politically charged issues, conservatives worry that the judiciary is becoming an extension of partisan politics rather than a neutral arbiter of the law.
What Comes Next?
As tensions between the branches of government continue to rise, the debate over the judiciary’s role in shaping policy is far from over. Levin warned that if the Supreme Court and Congress fail to take action, the constitutional framework of the United States could be at serious risk.
“If you don’t fix it,” he cautioned, “we’re going to lose our constitutional construct, or Congress is going to have to figure out some way to fix it.”
For now, the battle lines remain drawn. With upcoming legal battles on the horizon and a deeply divided political climate, the conflict between judicial authority and executive power will likely continue to dominate the national conversation. Whether Roberts and the Supreme Court heed Levin’s call to action remains to be seen, but one thing is certain—Levin isn’t backing down anytime soon.
Login