On Wednesday, Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) took to the social media platform X to raise concerns over the repeated assignment of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg to multiple high-profile cases concerning President Donald Trump. In his post, he referred to the pattern as a “statistical impossibility,” suggesting this could result from potential bias in the judicial process.

Schmitt wrote, “Judge James Boasberg has somehow been assigned FOUR major Trump cases. A statistical impossibility. That isn’t ‘random.’ It’s rigged.”

Boasberg, who is the chief justice of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, has now presided over several critical cases connected to the president. One is the lawsuit over the use of Signal, an encrypted messaging app, by a senior official to talk about sensitive military operations.

Another important example is the challenge of deportation policies under the Alien Enemies Act, which Trump has been using to send dangerous criminal illegals back to their country of origin.

In March 2025, Judge Boasberg ordered that Trump officials save Signal messages that were sent between March 11 and 15 that were connected in any way to the military operation in Yemen. The order was given after a number of concerns came up about potential violations of federal record-keeping laws due to the app’s auto-delete feature.

Lawmakers have become suspicious of Boasberg’s repeated assignment to Trump cases. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent out a letter to the Clerk of the Court for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. He was joined by Reps. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Chip Roy (R-TX). The letter raised serious questions about the case assignment process and the potential for bias.

A user on X weighed in on the situation, saying, “This judge needs to be disbarred…he is using his power as a judge wrong and this cannot stand!!!”

Another suggested that Schmitt use his political power and influence as a senator to take action against the judge and fix the situation.

The court continues to maintain its position that the case assignments are, in fact, random, despite allegations that Boasberg’s involvement in so many Trump-related cases means the system is “rigged.” The situation highlights the current tensions that exist between the judiciary and political figures in Congress, showcasing the importance of both transparency and impartiality in the legal process.