Republican leadership in the House has shown little interest in impeaching judges, according to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).
As a “silver bullet” against activist judges, he praised a House measure that restricted federal district courts’ ability to issue worldwide injunctions in the majority of instances.
When asked by HeadlinesForever Digital to rule out the possibility of impeachment permanently, Johnson refused. However, he did warn that the stakes were high for such moves, and he acknowledged the difficulty of obtaining the necessary votes to remove the president from office in the Senate and impeach him in the House.
“Listen, if there is cause, impeachment is always an option. Unfortunately, throughout our nation’s history, there have only been fifteen instances of federal judges being impeached. There could be a few who I think deserve it, but you need votes to make it official, right? The weight of that is enormous, Johnson added.
And just so you know, even if we could pass an impeachment article against a federal judge in the House, it’s highly doubtful that we would be able to try and convict them in the Senate due to our split numbers. After that, what other options do we have?”
According to the speaker, Republicans in the House have “done everything within our power to solve that problem.”
“Darrell Issa’s bill is a great response: The No Rogue Rulings Act would prohibit a single individual judgment issuing a nationwide injunction like that to stop the entire policy of an administration,” said Johnson.
We expected the Senate would be able to take it up, so we forwarded it to them after passing it through the House. This shouldn’t come down to party lines, therefore I’m crossing my fingers that they can.
But there are conservatives who are eager to go down the impeachment road. A “privileged” resolution, which would need its consideration by Johnson within two legislative days, might be introduced to compel the House to do so.
The Senate need a minimum of a handful of Democrats to reach the two-thirds requirement for removal, thus this politically precarious endeavor is doomed to fail.
The new president’s policies, including deportation flights and the Department of Government Efficiency, have been the subject of a protracted legal battle.
Democrats accuse the administration of going to war with a separate but equal body of government, while Republicans have written off the judgments as political maneuvering by activist judges.
On the other hand, the Trump administration has repeatedly denied any involvement from activist judges in both the courtroom and the media, while maintaining that it is following all legitimate court orders.