A shocking memo has surfaced, revealing a disturbing bias among D.C. judges against the Trump administration, igniting fears of a constitutional crisis. The explosive document, uncovered by Margot Cleveland of the Federalist, details a meeting where judges, including Chief Justice John Roberts, openly discussed their concerns about Trump potentially ignoring federal court rulings. Judge Boasberg’s remarks during this clandestine gathering have raised alarms over the integrity of the judiciary, suggesting that some judges are not only predisposed against Trump but are actively strategizing on how to counter his administration.

In a conversation that should never have left the courtroom walls, Boasberg questioned Roberts on how to thwart Trump, expressing fears that the administration could disregard judicial authority. This revelation has sent shockwaves through the legal community, with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanch calling it a “serious breach of the judicial oath.” The memo indicates a troubling departure from the traditional presumption of judicial neutrality, as these judges seem to view Trump not merely as a political figure but as a direct threat to the rule of law.

As the fallout from this memo continues, critics are demanding accountability for what they see as a blatant disregard for fairness in the judicial process. The implications are staggering: if judges are plotting in backroom meetings to undermine a sitting president, what does that mean for the integrity of the judicial system? This is not just about Trump; it’s about the very foundation of American democracy. The urgency of this situation cannot be overstated. As the nation watches, the Supreme Court may soon need to intervene to restore faith in a system that appears to have veered dangerously off course. The judiciary must uphold its commitment to impartiality, or risk plunging the country into a constitutional crisis of unprecedented proportions.