Leavitt: 67% of All Injunctions This Century Against Trump, 92% From Democrat Judges; Walz “Sad Existence”; Manufacturing Surges

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt delivered a data-heavy March 2025 briefing that built the administration’s most comprehensive case against judicial activism. She revealed that 67% of all federal injunctions issued this century had targeted President Trump, and 92% of those came from Democrat-appointed judges. She called out Judge Bosburg by name as “a Democrat activist” appointed by Obama whose wife donated over $10,000 to Democrats, mocked Tim Walz for celebrating Tesla’s stock decline, announced that manufacturing production had surged to its highest recorded level, and confirmed the release of approximately 80,000 pages of previously classified JFK assassination records.

”67% Against One President”

Leavitt opened with the statistic that anchored the entire briefing.

“67% of all of the injunctions in this century have come against which president? Donald J. Trump,” Leavitt said. “Let me say that again. 67% of the injunctions by partisan activists in the judicial branch have come against President Donald Trump, and 92% of those have been from Democrat-appointed judges.”

She drew the conclusion: “This is a clear concerted effort by leftists who don’t like this president and are trying to impose or slow down his agenda.”

The numbers were staggering in their implications. If two-thirds of all federal injunctions issued since the year 2000 had targeted a single president — one who had served for approximately six of those twenty-five years — the judicial system was not functioning as a neutral arbiter of constitutional questions. It was functioning as a partisan weapon deployed asymmetrically against Republican governance.

The 92% figure was even more telling. If nearly all of the injunctions against Trump came from judges appointed by Democratic presidents, the pattern could not be attributed to coincidence or to Trump’s policies being uniquely unlawful. It suggested that judicial appointments had created a network of judges who could be relied upon to block Republican policy priorities, and that plaintiffs were systematically seeking those judges — a practice Leavitt would address directly.

Judge Shopping: “Incredibly Apparent”

Leavitt escalated from statistics to accusations.

“The judges in this country are acting erroneously,” she said. “We have judges who are acting as partisan activists from the bench. They are trying to dictate policy from the president of the United States. They are trying to clearly slow walk this administration’s agenda, and it’s unacceptable.”

She acknowledged that the administration would work within the system — “As the president said last night, we will continue to comply with these court orders. We will continue to fight these battles in courts” — before delivering the structural critique.

“But it’s incredibly apparent that there is a concerted effort by the far left to judge shop — to pick judges who are clearly acting as partisan activists from the bench in an attempt to derail this president’s agenda,” Leavitt said. “We will not allow that to happen.”

She broadened the argument beyond institutional politics: “And not only are they usurping the will of the president and the chief executive of our country, but they are undermining the will of the American public. Tens of millions of Americans who duly elected this president to implement the policies that are coming out of this White House.”

The “undermining the will of the American public” framing transformed the judicial resistance from a legal dispute into a democratic one. It was not merely that judges were blocking a president’s policies — they were overriding an election. The voters had chosen Trump to implement specific policies; unelected judges were preventing those policies from taking effect. The question was whether the judiciary had the legitimate authority to functionally veto an electoral mandate.

Judge Bosburg: Named and Exposed

Leavitt departed from the general to the specific, calling out a particular judge by name.

“It’s very, very clear that this is an activist judge who is trying to usurp the president’s authority,” she said. “Under the Alien Enemies Act, the president has this power, and that’s why this deportation campaign has continued.”

“And this judge — Judge Bosburg — is a Democrat activist,” Leavitt said. “He was appointed by Barack Obama. His wife has donated more than $10,000 to Democrats. And he has consistently shown his disdain for this president and his policies, and it’s unacceptable.”

The decision to name the judge, cite his appointing president, and reference his wife’s political donations was a deliberate escalation. The administration was not just arguing that judicial activism existed in the abstract — it was identifying specific judges, their political connections, and their partisan behavior. The implication was that judges who had financial and political ties to the Democratic Party could not be trusted to rule impartially on challenges to a Republican president’s policies.

Walz: “A Sad Existence”

When asked about former Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s public comment that he frequently checked Tesla’s stock price to “give me a little boost during the day” — celebrating the company’s decline — Leavitt responded with a devastating assessment.

“I think that’s quite sad,” Leavitt said, “but I think Governor Walz unfortunately is living a sad existence after his devastating defeat on November 5th.”

The response was efficient in its cruelty. Rather than defending Tesla or Elon Musk, Leavitt reframed Walz’s behavior as pathetic rather than threatening. A former vice presidential candidate was reduced to checking stock prices for emotional satisfaction — a picture of diminished relevance that needed no further elaboration.

The substantive question beneath the quip was worth noting: the reporter had asked “how should Americans view politicians who take pride in the downfall of an American car company?” The framing itself was the argument. Whatever one thought of Musk’s politics or Tesla’s stock performance, publicly celebrating the decline of a major American manufacturer and employer was a remarkable position for a politician to take.

Manufacturing: “Highest Ever Recorded Level”

Leavitt delivered the economic data that provided the positive counterpoint to the judicial and political battles.

“After suffering a steep decline in the final year of the Biden administration, the manufacturing sector came roaring back in February,” she said. “Industrial production surged in February — these are new numbers — at a greater three times rate than the expectations, to its highest ever recorded level.”

She connected the numbers to policy: “President Trump’s laser focus on massive deregulation and unleashing our domestic energy industry is leading to stabilities for Americans’ bottom lines.”

She added the gas price data: “As Newsweek summed it up today, gas prices are plummeting under President Trump.”

The manufacturing data was particularly significant because it directly supported the tariff argument. Critics had warned that tariffs would damage the manufacturing sector; instead, production had surged to record levels. Whether the surge was caused by tariffs, deregulation, energy policy, or some combination was debatable, but the directional evidence was clear: the manufacturing sector was not collapsing under protectionism — it was expanding.

JFK Files: 80,000 Pages Released

Leavitt confirmed the historic document release that Trump had previewed.

“President Trump also promised maximum transparency and a commitment to rebuild the trust of the American people in our intelligence community,” she said. “And he made that happen yesterday.”

She provided the specifics: “This historic release consisted of approximately 80,000 pages of previously classified records that are now published. The records are available to access either online at archives.gov/jfk or in person, accessible to the American people at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland.”

She noted that digitization was ongoing: “Records that are currently only available for in-person viewing are being digitized and will be uploaded in the coming days.”

The 80,000-page figure gave concrete scale to Trump’s transparency promise. These were not abstractions or partial releases with extensive redactions — they were tens of thousands of pages that the intelligence community had kept classified for decades and that were now available for any American to read.

Key Takeaways

• Leavitt revealed that 67% of all federal injunctions this century targeted Trump, and 92% of those came from Democrat-appointed judges, calling it “a clear concerted effort.”
• She named Judge Bosburg as “a Democrat activist” appointed by Obama whose wife donated over $10,000 to Democrats.
• On Walz celebrating Tesla’s stock decline: “I think Governor Walz is unfortunately living a sad existence after his devastating defeat on November 5th.”
• Manufacturing surged to its “highest ever recorded level” in February, at three times the expected rate, after declining in Biden’s final year.
• The JFK files release consisted of approximately 80,000 pages of previously classified records, now available at archives.gov/jfk.