Activist judges have been blocking Trump's agenda at every turn.
They think they can overrule the President on anything.
But Fox News’ Gregg Jarrett just delivered one knockout blow that left activist judges reeling.
Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett appeared on "Fox and Friends" with a message for judges trying to block Trump's National Guard deployments.
Stop playing super-president.
Jarrett took aim at U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut's ruling blocking Trump from deploying National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon.
The judge claimed protests at the ICE facility weren't violent enough to justify federal protection.
That's despite death threats against ICE agents skyrocketing 8,000% and assaults jumping 1,000% year-over-year.¹
Jarrett exposes judges ignoring their own court's precedent
Jarrett didn't mince words about Judge Immergut defying established law.
"This Portland judge is ignoring what the higher court, the Ninth Circuit previously said when she first halted Trump's deployment of the National Guard and that is that the president lawfully exercised his authority and the judges must always give a great level of deference to the chief executive when he decides that troops are necessary to enforce law and order," Jarrett told "Fox and Friends" co-host Lawrence Jones.²
The Ninth Circuit had actually overturned one of Immergut's earlier rulings.
A three-judge panel said Trump acted lawfully.
But when the full court agreed to hear the case en banc, it restored Immergut's block on the deployment.
Jarrett pointed out this violated the separation of powers the Founders built into the Constitution.
"The court said that a judge may not substitute his or her own judgment for that of the president when it comes to matters of national security," Jarrett explained. "Why? Because it's a constitutional, statutory power vested solely in the president not jurists."³
Judge Immergut held a three-day trial where Portland officials testified the ICE facility wasn't being targeted by violence.
This happened despite anti-ICE rioters planning to aim lasers at federal helicopters.⁴
The reality on the ground told a completely different story than what Judge Immergut wanted to believe.
Two illegal immigrants were killed during a shooting at the ICE office in Dallas on September 24.⁵
Ten people faced attempted murder charges after an ambush on an ICE detention facility in Texas.⁶
An illegal immigrant in Dallas posted on TikTok offering $10,000 bounties for murdering ICE agents.⁷
ICE officers had their family members doxxed and threatened.⁸
One officer had someone dump trash on their lawn with signs reading "F**k you" and their name.⁹
Democratic officials across the country were actively helping illegal immigrants evade ICE arrests.
A Milwaukee judge allegedly helped an illegal immigrant escape ICE agents in April.¹⁰
Nashville's Democratic Mayor Freddie O'Connell released the names of ICE agents involved in enforcement operations.¹¹
Democrat mayoral candidate Brad Lander got arrested in New York City after interfering with an ICE operation in Manhattan.¹²
But Judge Immergut decided none of this justified deploying troops to protect federal agents.
Jarrett warns about judges who think they're super-presidents
Jarrett told viewers this wasn't just about one rogue judge in Portland.
It's a pattern of activist judges treating themselves as co-equal branches with veto power over the President.
"You know, this particular judge, Karin Immergut, her ruling will now be reviewed by the full Ninth Circuit, inevitably the Supreme Court," Jarrett said. "But it does underscore what President Trump said last night his efforts to use ICE and federal law enforcement are constantly being interfered with by judges, same thing in Chicago."¹³
A federal judge in Chicago also blocked Trump's National Guard deployment to Illinois.
U.S. District Judge April Perry issued a 14-day temporary restraining order despite escalating violence at ICE facilities.¹⁴
The Supreme Court got forced to step in because lower court judges keep substituting their judgment for the President's on national security matters.
"The Supreme Court is now forced to get involved," Jarrett explained. "Too many judges think they are super-presidents who can countermand anything Trump does and that's not what the Constitution says."¹⁵
Trump himself expressed disbelief that judges were blocking his efforts to protect federal agents.
"We want to weed out corruption," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. "And it seems hard to believe that a judge could say, we don't want you to do that."¹⁶
"So maybe we have to look at the judges, because that's very serious," Trump added.¹⁷
Attorney General Pam Bondi accused the judges of violating separation of powers.
"What they're doing to him, to our country is outrageous," Bondi said about judicial interference with Trump's enforcement agenda. "You know, people work their whole lives and pay taxes, yet they find out that they've been giving $2 million to Guatemala for sex changes, it's outrageous, and it's going to stop."¹⁸
The most infuriating part? Trump appointed Judge Immergut to the federal bench in 2019.
She had been a registered Democrat throughout the 1990s before switching to Republican when she went to work for Republican prosecutors.
Immergut changed her registration to "non-affiliated" in July 2025 — right before blocking Trump's National Guard deployments.¹⁹
White House advisor Stephen Miller called her rulings "legal insurrection."²⁰
Trump sent the National Guard into Memphis after the Charlie Kirk assassination on September 10 proved left-wing political violence had spiraled out of control.
The deployment worked exactly as Trump promised.
Crime dropped dramatically as federal forces restored order to a city drowning in violence.
Trump planned to replicate that success in Portland and other Democrat-run cities where left-wing mobs were attacking ICE facilities.
But activist judges decided they knew better than the Commander-in-Chief about when troops are needed.
Jarrett's analysis exposed the fundamental problem with how these judges view their role.
They're not neutral arbiters applying the law.
They're political operatives using black robes to block Trump's mandate from voters.
The Constitution vests national security decisions in the President, not unelected judges with lifetime appointments.
The Founders designed it that way for a reason.
A single judge in Oregon shouldn't be able to override the President's assessment that federal agents need protection from violent mobs.
The Supreme Court will ultimately have to remind lower court judges they don't get to play commander-in-chief.
But until then, Jarrett's takedown of judicial overreach stands as the definitive word on judges who forgot their place in the constitutional order.
¹ Daily Caller, "Legal Analyst Dunks on Leftist Judges Acting Like 'Super-Presidents' Thwarting Trump's Agenda," November 3, 2025.
² Ibid.
³ Ibid.
⁴ Ibid.
⁵ Ibid.
⁶ Ibid.
⁷ Department of Homeland Security, "8000% Increase in Death Threats Against ICE Law Enforcement," October 30, 2025.
⁸ Ibid.
⁹ Ibid.
¹⁰ Daily Caller, "Legal Analyst Dunks on Leftist Judges," November 3, 2025.
¹¹ Ibid.
¹² Ibid.
¹³ Ibid.
¹⁴ ABC News, "Judge temporarily blocks National Guard deployment in Illinois amid Chicago, Portland hearings," October 2025.
¹⁵ Daily Caller, "Legal Analyst Dunks on Leftist Judges," November 3, 2025.
¹⁶ Ibid.
¹⁷ Ibid.
¹⁸ Ibid.
¹⁹ OPB, "Colleagues say Oregon judge who blocked Trump troop deployment is 'well-respected' and 'has no fear,'" October 2025.
²⁰ CNN Politics, "Who is Karin Immergut, the Trump-appointed judge who ruled against his push to deploy troops in Oregon?" October 2025.
