This week, President Donald Trump added his voice to the growing calls for punitive action against federal judges who have ruled unfavorably toward his administration. However, given the current composition of Congress, impeachment and removal remain improbable.
The push to impeach federal judges intensified when President Trump publicly stated on social media that a U.S. district judge overseeing efforts to deport Venezuelan migrants suspected of gang affiliations should be removed from office.
Although this was the first instance in which Trump explicitly called for a judge’s impeachment, several Republican allies, along with White House senior advisor Elon Musk, have been vocal in their criticism of members of the judiciary who have overseen legal challenges against the administration and ruled against it.
In the House of Representatives, a small contingent of conservative lawmakers has introduced or endorsed impeachment resolutions against four federal judges. While these efforts are unlikely to lead to actual removals, they have reignited discussions on the impeachment process and the constitutional requirement that high crimes and misdemeanors must be proven to justify removal.
Republican Efforts to Impeach a Federal Judge
On Tuesday, Trump called for the impeachment of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, referring to him indirectly in a social media post as one of the many “crooked judges” presiding over cases involving him and stating that Boasberg should be impeached.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt further criticized Boasberg and other judges who have issued rulings that temporarily obstruct the administration’s initiatives.
“Judges in this country are overstepping their roles,” Leavitt asserted during a press briefing. “Some are acting as partisan activists from the bench, attempting to interfere with the president’s agenda, which is unacceptable.”
Leavitt reiterated that the president firmly believes impeachment is warranted in this case. She also emphasized that, despite these criticisms, the administration will continue to comply with judicial rulings and pursue legal appeals while arguing that certain judges are undermining the mandate given by the electorate.
On the same day as Trump’s remarks, Representative Brandon Gill, a Republican from Texas, filed articles of impeachment against Boasberg, alleging misconduct and calling for his removal. Five additional Republican lawmakers have co-sponsored the impeachment articles. Similar resolutions have been introduced against U.S. District Judges Paul Engelmayer, John Bates, and Amir Ali. Representative Andrew Clyde of Georgia previously announced his intent to draft articles against Judge John McConnell, though those documents have not yet been formally submitted.
Understanding the Impeachment Process
According to the U.S. Constitution, impeachment is reserved for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” It remains highly unlikely that any of the judges targeted in these impeachment resolutions have engaged in conduct that meets this stringent threshold.
As with presidential impeachment, the responsibility for removing judges lies with Congress. The House of Representatives holds the power to impeach, but the Senate is charged with conducting a trial to determine whether an official should be convicted and removed from office.
For an impeachment resolution to proceed, it must first be adopted by a simple majority in the House. The articles of impeachment are then transmitted to the Senate, which has the exclusive authority to hold a trial and determine the outcome. A conviction and removal from office require a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate. Although Republicans currently hold a majority in the chamber with 53 seats, this number falls short of the 67 votes necessary for removal.
Potential Congressional Actions
How Congress will proceed remains uncertain. White House Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair suggested that the matter would ultimately be decided by House Speaker Mike Johnson, who will determine the legislative course of action.
“The president is highlighting an important issue, but whether impeachment moves forward depends on the leadership of Congress,” Blair stated.
Speaker Johnson has several options if impeachment is brought forward, including allowing a full House vote, tabling the resolution, or referring it to committee for further deliberation. The matter would likely be assigned to the House Judiciary Committee, where an investigation and hearings would take place before any decision is made to advance the resolution.
Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio has stated that, for House Republicans and the Judiciary Committee, “all options remain on the table.”
Despite these efforts, an impeachment process would demand significant time and resources, which some congressional Republicans prefer to allocate to passing major budget legislation that would facilitate the administration’s policy goals.
When asked whether an impeachment trial could divert attention from the administration’s broader agenda, Blair expressed skepticism that extensive legislative time would be committed to the effort unless there was a reasonable likelihood of success.
Historical Precedent for Judicial Impeachment
Impeachment of federal judges is rare. According to the Federal Judicial Center, only 14 federal judges and one Supreme Court justice have ever been impeached by the House, and only eight of those individuals were subsequently convicted and removed from office by the Senate.
Judges Facing Impeachment Efforts
The recent impeachment resolutions have targeted four judges who issued preliminary rulings against the administration’s policies:
Paul Engelmayer (Southern District of New York): Appointed by President Barack Obama in 2011 and confirmed by the Senate with a 98-0 vote, Engelmayer temporarily blocked the Trump administration from accessing certain Treasury Department databases, which led to accusations of judicial misconduct.
Amir Ali (Washington, D.C. District Court): Appointed by President Joe Biden and confirmed in a narrow 50-49 Senate vote, Ali is overseeing a legal challenge to the administration’s freeze on foreign assistance. He issued a temporary order requiring the reinstatement of funding while litigation continues.
John Bates (Washington, D.C. District Court): A long-serving judge appointed by President George W. Bush in 2001 and confirmed with a 97-0 vote, Bates is presiding over multiple cases related to Trump administration policies. Recently, he ruled that certain Department of Health and Human Services webpages removed by the administration must be restored pending further legal proceedings.
James Boasberg (Washington, D.C. District Court): The most targeted judge, Boasberg blocked the administration from invoking the Alien Enemies Act to deport certain immigrants. Initially appointed to the D.C. Superior Court by President George W. Bush, he was later nominated to the federal bench by President Obama and confirmed with a 96-0 Senate vote.
Judicial Response to Impeachment Calls
In response to Trump’s calls for Boasberg’s impeachment, Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare public statement, emphasizing that judicial impeachment should not be a reaction to disagreement over legal decisions.
“For over two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not the appropriate response to dissatisfaction with judicial rulings. The normal appellate process exists for this purpose,” Roberts stated.
Roberts has previously spoken against political attacks on the judiciary. In 2020, he condemned remarks by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer as “inappropriate and dangerous” and similarly rejected comments by Trump in 2018 when the former president referred to a ruling judge as an “Obama judge.”
“There are no ‘Obama judges’ or ‘Trump judges,’ nor ‘Bush judges’ or ‘Clinton judges.’ We have an exceptional group of dedicated jurists committed to delivering impartial justice,” Roberts affirmed.
