House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., signaled there is little appetite for judicial impeachments among House Republican leaders.
He said a bill passed by the House earlier this year, aimed at limiting federal district judges from issuing nationwide injunctions in most cases, was a ‘silver bullet’ against activist judges.
Johnson refused to pull impeachment off the table indefinitely when pressed by Fox News Digital, but he cautioned that there was a high bar for such maneuvers, while noting that getting enough votes to impeach in the House and remove in the Senate is an uphill battle in itself.
‘Look, impeachments are never off the table if it’s merited. But in our system, we’ve had 15 federal judges impeached in the entire history of the country. I mean, there may be some that I feel merit that, but you’ve got to get the votes for it, right? And it’s a very high burden,’ Johnson said.
‘And by the way, even if we could get an impeachment article through the House on a federal judge, it’s unlikely that they would be tried and convicted in the Senate on that, with the divided number we have. So, short of that, what can we do?’
The speaker said House Republicans had ‘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,’ Johnson said.
‘We passed it to the House, we sent it to the Senate with every expectation that they should be able to take that up. And I certainly hope they can, because, again, shouldn’t be a partisan issue.’
Some conservatives, however, are still hungry to pursue the impeachment route. They could force the House to do so by introducing a ‘privileged’ resolution, meaning Johnson would need to take it up within two legislative days.
However, it is a politically risky undertaking that is ultimately guaranteed to fail in the Senate, where at least several Democrats would be needed to meet the two-thirds threshold for removal.
It comes amid the Trump administration’s continued standoff with the courts over a litany of the new White House’s policies — from deportation flights to the Department of Government Efficiency.
Republicans have dismissed the rulings as political decisions by activist judges, while Democrats accuse the White House of waging war on a co-equal branch of government.
The Trump administration, meanwhile, has consistently said it is complying with all lawful court orders while denouncing activist judges in court and in the media sphere.
