On Wednesday’s Mark Levin Show, you are hearing it in the leftwing press, in the Never-Trump editorial pages and more – you cannot and must not deport anyone without some kind of notice and due process. Yet, there’s nothing from these people on how this is supposed to actually work. What kind of due process are they talking about? The kind of due process that applies to citizens? If not, then what lower standard suffices as constitutional due process? Exactly how would due process, of any kind, be administered to millions and millions of illegal immigrants? We don’t have enough courts of any kind in our country to handle the tsunami of cases that would be involved. This was all intentional. The border was opened to anyone. This is the Cloward-Pivens strategy: flood the system, overwhelm the system, break the system, and in doing so achieve your goals. Effectively, this is massive amnesty. Also, it seems these Federal judges are trying to stop mass deportation efforts and disrupt the Trump administration’s response to Biden’s mass immigration policies. Later, Hans von Spakovsky calls in and explains that he was stunned by Judge Boasberg’s order because he’s blatantly defying the Supreme Court. Boasberg’s order was void from the moment he signed it. So how can he hold the Trump administration in contempt? Either Boasberg is incompetent or he’s deliberately ignoring the Supreme Court. Afterward, Jonathan Turley calls in to discuss the criminal referral against NY AG Letitia James. James claims that her Virginia home was her principal residence. That was not and cannot be true because she was and still is an official of the New York government who must live within the state. What’s notable about her false statements is that each one worked towards a better mortgage rate. Then, the Declaration of Independence discusses natural law and natural rights. Where do these concepts originate? They are influenced by John Locke and Montesquieu, but not entirely, as they ultimately come from God. When they say the people are sovereign, that ide comes from God. This is why the government can never be sovereign. The United States is first county on earth to be founded on these principles. Finally, Heritage President, Kevin Roberts, calls in to discuss the organization’s impactful projects and ongoing efforts to revitalize federalism in America. Roberts shares insights on the current political landscape, the significance of state legislative work, and the importance of maintaining a conservative agenda while addressing challenges such as tariffs and international relations.
Fox News
Federal Judge James Boasberg finds probable cause to hold Trump in contempt over deportation flights
Photo by Qian Weizhong/VCG
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Rough transcription of Hour 1
Segment 1
Hello, America. Mark Levin here. Our number 877-381-3811. 877-381-3811. Let me start this way, America due process illegal aliens in the no nothings. You’re hearing it in the left wing press in the never Trump editorial pages and columns. Interviews with former federal prosecutors and more. You cannot and must not deport anyone without some kind of notice and due process. That’s the American way that’s compelled by our Constitution. So I’m laying down a marker now. You’ll hear this regurgitated elsewhere, no doubt after. Yet, no matter how much I look, I cannot find anything from these people on how this is supposed to actually work. What kind of due process are they talking about? The kind of due process that applies to citizens. If not, then what? Lower standards suffices as constitutional due process. And who decides? Immigration judges. Federal District judges. Exactly. How would due process of any kind be administered to millions and millions of illegal immigrants? We don’t have courts, that is, we don’t have enough courts of any kind in our country to handle the tsunami of cases that would be involved in millions and millions of cases. In other words, our government could never process all these people, meaning a massive number of illegal immigrants would be able to stay here indefinitely. Effectively, this is massive amnesty. And how would we force them to appear in court in the first place? Even now, millions don’t show up on their court dates. They just disappear into the population. This was all intentional. The border was open to anyone. In fact, aliens were encouraged to come here and hundreds of thousands were flown into the country under a bastardized parole process, which was instituted by a Biden executive order in the contravention of federal law. This is the Cloud Piven strategy. Flood the system, overwhelm the system, break the system, and in doing so, achieve your goals. The same people and the Democrat Party and the media and their NeverTrump sycophants who opened the border and solicited the illegal entry of millions of aliens into our country and who don’t give a damn about any of the women who were sold into sex slavery. And the hundreds of thousands of missing unaccompanied minors now claim to be concerned about due process when their objective is to prevent the deportation of millions of aliens they brought here in the first place. Oh. And to those legal analysts on websites and in the media, rather than your self-righteous moral preening, why don’t you lay out your legal and administrative program so we can all benefit from your enlightened wisdom on how to remove millions of illegal aliens who are illegally imported by the Biden regime? That’s all. What do you think of that, Mr. Produce? The point is, ladies and gentlemen, we don’t even have a legal infrastructure to process millions and millions of people. Through some kind of due process rights and what makes due process constitutional, some lower level of due process. What’s the standard we have? We don’t have one. We don’t know. Now some might point, well, look at our immigration laws under this circumstance and on circumstance, that’s a little bit of the tale. Wagging the dog. It’s not what I’m talking about, this circumstance or that circumstance. I’m talking about millions and millions of aliens who are in the country. You don’t know in advance. Whether this or that applies, you got to find them and find out whether this or that applies. And it applies in a small percentage of the cases, the vast majority of the people who are here illegally, the crime that they committed is their presence here illegally. I’m just wondering, how are you going to process them and how you first of all, you going to force them to show up? And so there are serious issues here. And the people who masterminded. This illegal immigration, massive importation in violation of our immigration laws. Around many of the same lawyers, same politicians, same think tanks and ethnic front groups. Who are complaining about due process. And for our friends at National Review, and I’m not going to call them out by name because I don’t want to humiliate them. Don’t you get sick and tired of writing to yourselves? If you have a plan, let’s see it. Let’s see it now. If you believe due process should apply to everybody and I mean everybody. Before they’re to be deported. Then tell us what kind of due process. Full throated due process that United States citizens get something short of that. Like what? What will withstand constitutional challenge? What does the Constitution compel? Right it tell us. Well, Congress can pass. No, no, no, no. This is an issue of due process under the Constitution. Congress can’t change it by statute. You’re not messing around here. Well, one of these back bencher slip and fall laws. Somebody who actually knows the topic. I’m asking you. I am calling you out. I am challenging you right now. What is the constitutional due process standard that you’re thinking about? Who determines it? Administrative law, judges, federal district judges. I assume the Supreme Court at some point will get to write it and make it up. So much for originalism. But nonetheless. Just tell me. And then tell me how administratively this is going to be enforced. You know, it’s one thing to have a standard now, whatever that standard is, which I would love to see. So I can question it. Well, whatever that standard is. Notice, they’ll say, okay, great. Notice whatever it is. How do you compel people to show up? How do you compel them to meet their scheduled court date? Which courts are we talking about? We certainly don’t have enough administrative immigration judges, let alone federal judges. Can you imagine 10 million people flooding the system? There’ll be no time for any other kind of cases. What should we do? Higher. 10,000. 20. 50,000. Administrative law Judge is what should we do? Add another thousand of these genius lawyers to federal district judge ships. How are we going to handle this? I want to know because Biden destroyed the system. And what all these people are arguing for. Hear me now, America. Mr. or Mrs. America, Put down your. Your sandwich. Raise the radio in your car, Mr. and Mrs. America. What’s going on? Here is an argument for massive, Massive. Amnesty. Because we cannot handle all this. It’s impossible. We’ve never seen anything like this before. We’ve never seen anything like this before. I went back and looked at the due process issues that arose. When Eisenhower had the military round up people and send them out of the country. Mexicans, many Mexican-Americans accidentally. Notice how the Democrats in the media love Eisenhower. They figure he’s a rhino, but he did what he did. He called it Operation Wetback. I didn’t. That’s a racist phrase. He used it sort of a. Cesar Chavez, by the way. Because he felt these people were purposely undermining the farm workers union movement. But that aside. What they’re asking for is something that’s truly impossible. And they know it. And they know it. And they have radical judges backing them up. One in Boston who just ruled that 500 and some thousand, I think it’s 530,000, give or take, people who were actually flown into this country under an executive order signed by Biden. Signed by Biden, an executive order. Which effectively rewrote the parole provision of our immigration laws, in other words, bastardized them. So he could bring them all in. She just ruled that you cannot deport those people, even though that was done by executive order and can be undone by executive orders, she said. Now, some sort of due process rights apply, and I’m sitting here scratching my head. Really? And which due process rights are you talking about? Which ones? I noticed in the Supreme Court’s ruling that everybody points to here. Which I have in front of me, which is a tiny little thing. Eight or nine pages. And half of it’s the descent or the descent or What did they do? They always do. They didn’t really dissent. They dissented, but said they didn’t dissent. There would be Sotomayor and the rest with their their own disposition of the application. The relevant part of this. That people are signing. People are debating over the language and they’re debating over because the Supreme Court was ambiguous. That’s why. And purposely so. The lower court’s order probably properly requires the government to quote unquote facilitate Abrego Garcia’s. This guy from Maryland is now a cause celeb. An illegal alien should be deported his release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term effectuate in the district Court’s order is, however, unclear and may exceed the district court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive. We do regard for the deference owed to the executive branch in the conduct of foreign affairs. For its part, the government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps. The order here, here therefore entered the Chief Justice has vacated. You know that this says nothing. That’s why people are fighting over. It’s a great victory. It’s a great loss. The word facilitate a perfectly ambiguous bureaucratic word effectuate. What they’re saying here is, as I read the tea leaves, look, there is a separation of powers issue. The executive branch handles foreign policy. So when you say effectuate lower court, you need to spell out exactly what you mean. So you’re not interfering in foreign policy. You’re not violating separation of powers. In terms of the word facility. The government, meaning the Trump administration. Needs to facilitate. Facilitate the release from custody in El Salvador of Garcia. Back to the United States. So the first part of the same of that sentence contradicts the next sentence. You need to facilitate the return. But. Effectuate in the district court’s order. Unclear to me how that may proceed. So clarify what you mean by effectuate and while you’re at a government facility. Now, Mr. Producer, does this make any sense to you? Let me read it again the relevant part. The order properly requires the government to facilitate their putting quotes around it, because that’s the lower court’s language. Garcia’s released from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador, the intended scope of the term effectuate in the district Court’s order is, however, unclear and may exceed the district court’s authority. What’s going on here? What the Supreme Court could have said to put an end to this is, look, maybe errors were made in this process. But as a practical matter, even if Mr. Garcia returned. They will immediately institute deportation orders and have him removed anyway. Putting aside Ms. 13 and all the rest. Putting it aside. It’s pointless. That’s the point. Moreover, if the Supreme Court has some notion. And what it means by a process, then spell it out. For the other 10 million illegal aliens. And tell us how the lower courts are supposed to handle this. Tell us. Or you have to leave it. The National Review and the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal to go on and on and lecture and lecture and tell us absolutely zippo, nothing. I’ll be right back.
Segment 2
Now we have this nutjob judge name Boasberg in Washington, D.C.. And I go through his opinion here. It’s a long opinion where he’s setting up the contempt, criminal contempt, not even civil contempt for the Trump administration. Now, keep in mind, the Supreme Court already said it lacks jurisdiction. But I guess he’s claiming jurisdiction as it applies to contempt for them not following his order, which, by the way, was not written as it is required to be in that district. But he doesn’t care. He just bulldozes right through the guy. The guy apparently is unhinged about this. So radical kook. He’s unhinged. And of course, these Venezuelan mobsters are in prison in El Salvador. And he takes it personally so he doesn’t have the temperament to be a judge, more like a defendant. Nonetheless, I want to read something that he put in his opinion that was pointed out to me by my buddy Mike here in let you know just how unhinged this guy is. We’ll be right back.
Segment 3
Oh, baby. Here with me. It’s a great honor to be with you folks. So this judge Boasberg is the Washington, D.C. judge. And I can understand you’re getting confused by all this. There’s so many of these crazy, unhinged federal left wing judges, it’s hard to take. We got one in Boston that just said that the president cannot, by executive order, deport the people that Biden brought in by executive order. More talk about due process, but they don’t explain what they mean by that. Is it? Executive branch due process of some kind. What are they talking about? And it’s been going on for days. And, you know, you watch all the TVs you want, listen, all the radio you want, you don’t get an answer because you don’t even get the question asked. What are they talking about exactly, when they say due process. And if they know what they’re talking about, what’s the authority for it? And if you’re not talking about full blown constitutional due process, what the hell are you talking about? And how is it constitutional? And who’s going to decide? Well, eventually the Supreme Court. I know that, but that’s not what I’m saying. Assertions are being made. Not only do you need to back him up, but even if you assume you’re right, how is this going to play out? How does this work? How does it work? You know, I talk to somebody who used to be chief of staff to an attorney general, and so my mind works. You go from the philosophical, you go to the constitutional, you go to the legal, but you’ve got to figure these things out, right? That’s what you’ve got to do. But they haven’t. So here we have a judge. Let’s see here, Boasberg Now, the Supreme Court told him. That you don’t have jurisdiction. That this case doesn’t belong in Washington, D.C.. It belongs in. Texas. What are you doing with the case? But the guy is going to continue to pursue this contempt issue, Criminal contempt and even civil contempt. Criminal contempt. And so there is two ways to look at that. Number one, comedy, you get this anywhere else on radio. Honest to God, Mr. Booze or TV. No, I’m walking you through this because this is your life. This affects you. What these lawyers are doing, what these courts are doing, what the government is doing, what these radical left wing groups are doing. It all affects your life. You look around and say, Where do all these people come from? I’m telling you what’s going on. So the judge might say, look, I don’t have jurisdiction in the case anymore, but I sure as hell have jurisdiction on the order that I issued and they violated my order. I don’t believe they did, because it wasn’t in writing, number one. And when he put it in writing, it was too late. But let’s add the third point, which is clearly what he was doing was interfering with foreign policy because these Venezuelan gang members were sent here by another country. They’re an international gang. They do conduct themselves. If you look at the definition in terrorist ways and the secretary of state has said they are, and that’s the end of it. That’s it. It’s no judicial review and all the rash words that come from blab, I got to do it anyway. And so for all those sticklers, and I’m one of them for following the procedures in the Constitution, this assumes a lot of stuff about the Constitution empowering this court that doesn’t exist. You’re dealing with the entrails. You’re not dealing with the with the source of the entrails. So you write your next steps on page 43. So now what? The Court Last details the next steps. That these proceedings may take. Now, first of all, listen to that line. The court last details. Is this English? The next steps that these proceedings may take. Oh, okay. Got it. First before initiating any criminal contempt proceedings. Courts typically allow the. The party and opportunity. Oh, the intimations, the contemptuous party, an opportunity to purge in contempt that is to remedy its violation by voluntarily obeying the court order. So he’s saying get all these these Venezuelan. Criminal international gang members back into the United States. You’re understand what I’m saying? Because that’s the only way to, quote unquote, fix this situation. That is to remedy its violation by voluntarily obeying the court order. A court should first says the Supreme Court applied coercive remedies in an effort to persuade a party to obey its orders and only make use of the more drastic criminal sanctions when the disobedience continues. That party happens to be another branch of government that says he has no authority, but he doesn’t care. He doesn’t care. The district Court will normally preface a contempt citation with an order directing either compliance with the subpoena or showing an excuse for the noncompliance. And he says the most obvious way for defendants to do so here is by asserting custody of the individuals who were removed. That is the Venezuelan hundreds of Venezuelan gang members. Custody. Who were removed in violation of the court’s class wide temporary restraining order. Got that. So they might avail themselves of the right to challenge their remove ability through a habeas proceeding. So everybody gets a habeas proceeding that is the right to petition a court and to say they have the wrong person or they shouldn’t have me here or whatever challenge they wish to raise, and they have a right to know what the challenges that the government’s bringing. It’s obvious what the government is saying. You’re here illegally and get the hell out of here. So even a habeas process is almost. I mean, it’s in the Constitution. You go through the process. I don’t know that it applies to these people, by the way, again. But that’s, let’s say, does. I mean, we’ve had the courts say it applies at some level, elementary level to terrorists. And I wrote that it shouldn’t even any McCarthy wrote that it should. But I guess he’s changed his view when it comes to Venezuelan gang members who’ve been. Determined to be terrorists by the executive branch. Per the items of the taro the government would need to release any of these individuals says would not need to. Nor would it need to transport them back to the homeland. The court will ask What? So they can do what? A petition by FedEx. By. By virtual, I mean, I don’t even know. The guy doesn’t know he does it say. The court will also give defendants an opportunity to propose other methods of coming into compliance, which the court will evaluate. So he wants the executive branch to come in, not on bended knee, bended on both knees. And so you know what, Your Honor? Or sorry. Yes, we’re sorry. We in the executive branch, we shouldn’t conduct immigration this way or foreign policy this way. No, we’re sorry. In the event that defendants do not choose to purge their contempt, the court will proceed to identify the individuals responsible by determining whose, quote, specific actor omission unquote caused the non-compliance. At the suggestion of the government in the last hearing, the court will begin by requiring declarations. Should those be unsatisfactory, the court will proceed either to hearings with live witnesses. So here’s what’s going on. These judges either got together formally on a phone or something, or one sees what the other’s doing. They said, okay, now, now, now that we’ve interfered with the executive branch, now we’re going to punish them. If they don’t if they don’t comply with us, we federal district judges. Because there’s another federal district judge in Maryland. In this Garcia case. You know, nice family man and all that. No, no, he’s not a nice guy. He’s not a nice family man. They have more information in 2021 that he beat his wife. Oh, excuse me. I didn’t get that piece. Was part of that. Ms. 13. And that judge has ordered him returned in Maryland. He got to Senator Van Hollen we mentioned. Last night. What a complete lowlife this guy is. He went down Salvador to beg for this guy’s release. This is how they feel about illegal aliens. This is what they believe. Now you got Soros judges and prosecutors all over the place. Got domestic criminals roaming all over the place. Now we have foreign gangs and criminals roaming all over the place. Far as we know, we’ve terrorists all over the place. Okay. Hey, Joe Biden did what he did. That’s okay. He doesn’t have to account to anybody for anything, even if he had his wits. Even if he had his wits. So this judge in Maryland. Says, Hey, government and government lawyers. You better have your suits ready and your underwear ready and everything else. Because if you’re thinking about taking a vacation over Christmas or excuse me, over Easter weekend, that ain’t happening. You’re going to be here for two weeks and you’re going to be deposed. So now the government’s going to be deposed. Their lawyers are going to be deposed. You see, they’re trying to wear down the Department of Justice. They’re trying to wear down the Trump administration. So one judge who’s poised to issue a criminal contempt order, who doesn’t even have jurisdiction anymore. We have another judge. Another judge in Maryland. Who’s planning to take depositions of individuals who represent the government. And we have other judges are contemplating similar things depending on the facts of their cases. That’s what they’re doing. So we need Zari saying they are going to appoint new special is who going to these judges? Oh, I don’t think so. But they could. One of them intimated that my friend Mike’s here works at Landmark Legal. You know, Mike, one of them intimated that they might. Right. Exactly. This one. Right. Right. Boasberg has intimated that he might appoint his own special counsel to get to the bottom of all this. Now, think about that. Thank you for reminding me about that. Think about that. And so the goal here is to try and stop any effort on mass deportations. The goal here is to cripple the ability of the Trump administration. To address the illegal mass importations by the prior administration. That is exactly what’s going on here. Exactly what’s going on here. And this judge, as Mike reminds me, even intimated he might appoint a special counsel on behalf of him, the judge, to investigate this. Got it. All right, well, move on. I’ll be right back.
Segment 4
After the top of the hour, we’re going to have Hans von Spakovsky on the program, Heritage Foundation, senior legal fellow. And we’re going to talk about, among other things, but primarily deportations and due process. What is meant by this At the bottom at 7:30 p.m., we’re going to have excuse me, our friend Jonathan Turley. He’s really good. I like this guy. And we’re going to talk about in an hour three. We’re going to have a very good friend. Brilliant scholar, president of the Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts I can count on one hand, Mr. Producer, how many times we’ve had three guests. But these are important guests. These are important issues. These are important times and obviously throughout. We’ve got a lot to cover here. A whole lot. And we’ll continue to do so. I’m looking for one of my documents here. It gets very busy here before I go on the program, you know, and we look over everything and I got to go and sometimes. Like the audio. You know. Patty Morin, an angel mom who taught her. Rachel Morin was murdered horrendously. She appeared at the press conference today. While all the press were concerned about the Ms. 13 member in Maryland. How much town by Rich? And I want you to hear what she had to say because, you know, you don’t get to hear from her. And I think Caroline Leavitt is brilliant. I think Donald Trump is brilliant. Time’s 100. And so they said, you know, why don’t you hear from one of the victim’s families? Not of this individual, but of individuals who are affected by illegal immigration. Cut 19. Go. Why are we not protecting the American citizens? It’s just common sense. Why are we not protecting our children? And to have a senator from Maryland who didn’t even acknowledge her barely acknowledged my daughter and the brutal death that she endured, leaving her five children without a mother and now a grandbaby without a grandmother, so that she can use my taxpayer money to fly to El Salvador to bring back someone that’s not even an American citizen. Why does that person have more right than I do for my daughter or my grandchildren? I don’t I don’t understand this. Mm hmm. Can you imagine going through this? Can you imagine? I can’t. I just can’t. And. It’s just horrible. Yes. To my friend who was texting me. Yes, that’s right. What remedies? Could the government have in place this this crackpot judge Boasberg. What remedies? You can try and fix this before I hold you in criminal contempt that since I thought there was page 43 as you read through it, it’s in that section as you go through it. And he’s saying they can try and fix this and come up with proposals, you know. Creative ideas, only way that they can fix it. According to this, judges either bring these terrorists back or he said, you don’t necessarily have to move them back. So. Government. You come up with a clever way to do this, But I. I have jurisdiction. So here’s my problem with this. He’s going to try and hold the the order and try and hold them in contempt. But he’s still violating the Supreme Court jurisdictional issue, which says, hey, you don’t have any jurisdiction. He’s telling them, you can fix this if you do X, Y, Z. While he doesn’t have any authority.