Connect with us

Congress

Trump calls for impeachment of judge who tried to halt deportations

Published

on

President Donald Trump on Tuesday called for the impeachment of the federal judge who ordered a two-week halt to his efforts to remove Venezuelan migrants using extraordinary war powers that haven’t been invoked for decades.

Trump’s call to remove U.S. District Judge James Boasberg — the chief judge of the federal district court in Washington, D.C. — is the first time since taking office for his second term that he’s asked Congress to seek a judge’s removal, joining increasingly pointed calls by his top donor and adviser Elon Musk and a segment of his MAGA base.

Trump also suggested that “many” of the judges who have ruled against him in other cases should be impeached as well. It’s a significant incursion on the judiciary that comes as Trump has asserted unprecedented unilateral power over federal spending — despite Congress’ constitutional power of the purse — and sweeping authority to remove executive branch officials that previous presidents believed were protected by law.

Although the call represents a significant escalation, any impeachment effort is all but certain to be doomed in Congress, where narrow Republican majorities would lack the votes to remove a judge along party lines. Congress has been loath to entertain impeachment efforts for judges based purely on rulings they disagree with and has typically invoked the extraordinary procedures in cases of clear corruption or misconduct.

Trump, in a post on Truth Social Tuesday morning, called Boasberg a “troublemaker and agitator.” The president also boasted of his sweeping electoral win, underscoring the mandate he believes he was given by the American people to govern. (Judges are given lifetime appointments to insulate them from political pressure and shifts in public opinion.)

“FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY,” Trump wrote. “I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do.”

For Trump, the attack on Boasberg is also an attempt to settle a score with a significant figure in his long-running criminal cases. Boasberg, as the chief judge, presided over key aspects of the grand jury proceedings that led to Trump’s criminal charges in Washington, D.C. for his attempt to subvert the 2020 election. Among Boasberg’s decisions: Requiring former Vice President Mike Pence to testify to the grand jury over Trump’s objection, and ruling that hundreds of emails from Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) should be disclosed to investigators.

Boasberg also presided over some of the grand jury proceedings related to Trump’s criminal case for hoarding classified documents at his Florida estate.

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has warned of the pernicious threat of politically motivated calls for the impeachment of judges over disagreements on rulings.

“Public officials … regrettably have engaged in recent attempts to intimidate judges — for example, suggesting political bias in the judge’s adverse rulings without a credible basis for such allegations,” Roberts wrote in a New Year’s Eve message last year. “Attempts to intimidate judges for their rulings in cases are inappropriate and should be vigorously opposed. Public officials certainly have a right to criticize the work of the judiciary, but they should be mindful that intemperance in their statements when it comes to judges may prompt dangerous reactions by others.”

Prior to Trump’s social media post, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a press briefing Tuesday that she had “not heard the president talking about impeachment.” But Trump allies, including conservative lawyer Mike Davis, had been floating a possible impeachment of Boasberg throughout the day on cable and conservative news networks.

The White House has, however, brushed off the idea that Trump’s expanding assertions of power over his coequal branches is causing a constitutional crisis, arguing that it is the courts who are overstepping their legal authority. Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, have largely been content to allow Trump to override their prerogatives.

In court on Monday, Boasberg peppered the administration with questions about whether it had deliberately ignored his order to turn around planes carrying the deportees — an argument the Justice Department responded to by arguing that his verbal order did not count, only his written order.

The Justice Department has also asked a federal appeals court to have Boasberg removed from the case, but the appeals court has not yet acted on their demand. The administration is due to respond to Boasberg’s request for information about the flights by noon Tuesday.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

Wyden urges Democrats to back FISA privacy amendments

Published

on

Sen. Ron Wyden sent a letter to his Democratic colleagues urging them to reject a clean renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ahead of an expected House vote on Wednesday.

The federal surveillance authority expires Monday, and House GOP leadersdelayed a renewal vote set for Wednesday after disagreements with some Republicans over including amendments addressing privacy concerns. The White House and Republican leaders are calling for renewal without any changes, but a bipartisan group of lawmakers are demanding guardrails to address concerns AI can significantly enhance the government’s mass surveillance capabilities.

“With recent developments in AI supercharging how the government can surveil Americans, Congress must use this upcoming debate to make necessary reforms to all our surveillance laws,” Wyden (D-Ore.) said in the letter obtained exclusively by POLITICO.

The senator sent a similar letter to House Democrats on Monday.

A final vote in the House could happen around 10 p.m. Wednesday if GOP leadership can strike an agreement with holdouts on changes to the bill. That would set up a possible Senate vote on Thursday.

Amendments could include requiring a warrant for purchasing Americans’ information from data brokers, and closing a loophole that allows the government to use the foreign surveillance authority to investigate American citizens.

Wyden’s letter also called for declassifying a FISA Court opinion from last month that he described as finding major compliance problems with Section 702.

Continue Reading

Congress

Vought: White House doesn’t have ‘ballpark’ total for Iran war funding

Published

on

White House budget director Russ Vought told lawmakers Wednesday that the Trump administration hasn’t settled on “a ballpark” range for how much funding it will ask Congress to approve for the Iran conflict.

“We’re not ready to come to you with a request. We’re still working on it. We’re working through to figure out what’s needed in this fiscal year versus next fiscal year,” Vought said during testimony before the House Budget Committee on President Donald Trump’s fiscal 2027 budget blueprint.

Republican lawmakers are eager to receive the White House’s request for the Iran war, as GOP leaders discuss whether to fashion an emergency funding package that might attract Democratic votes or use the party-line reconciliation process to boost military spending.

It has been more than six weeks since the U.S. and Israel launched airstrikes on Iran and almost a month since Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed that the Pentagon sent the White House a request for $200 billion in emergency funding to support the military during the conflict.

The White House has said the forthcoming military funding request amid the Iran onslaught is separate from the president’s request earlier this month for a record $1.5 trillion in defense funding for the upcoming fiscal year.

Vought could get more questions on this topic Thursday when he testifies before the Senate Budget Committee.

Continue Reading

Congress

GOP leaders delay FISA vote amid GOP rebellion

Published

on

House GOP leaders postponed a Wednesday procedural vote on an extension of a key federal spy powers program as they scramble to land a deal with hard-liners around changes — acknowledging the truly “clean” extension that President Donald Trump is demanding is currently DOA in the chamber.

There are ongoing discussions around modifying the clean, 18-month extension of the surveillance authority known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, that Trump is ordering. GOP leaders acknowledged in private conversations Tuesday night and publicly Wednesday morning that at least some tweaks are necessary to quell a GOP rebellion that could lead to Section 702’s expiration April 20.

Republican leaders are still hoping to hold a procedural vote later Wednesday to pave the way for floor consideration of the measure, if they can strike an agreement with hold-outs around some changes. A final vote would then happen around 10 p.m. Wednesday. But Speaker Mike Johnson was noncommittal in an interview late Wednesday morning if all that could still happen. “We’ll see,” he said.

Conversations around potential changes picked up Tuesday night, as Blue Light News first reported. Holdouts are asking for guardrails on the program, including warrant requirements; the White House is open to making changes in this regard but likely in a more watered-down capacity than what hard-liners have been seeking.

Ultraconservatives are also pushing House GOP leaders and the White House to follow through on a previous promise to advance a ban on a central bank digital currency, known as CBDC. House GOP leadership and the White House are pushing for a longer Section 702 extension in exchange for advancing that policy or other reforms, while some hard-liners want the promised CBDC ban passed as a standalone rather than attached to the FISA bill.

Majority Leader Steve Scalise said in an interview that White House officials, GOP leaders and Republican holdouts are discussing some “potential amendments.” He added, “We’re still negotiating.” He maintained GOP leaders and White House officials won’t incorporate any changes that undermine the underlying government surveillance program.

Nothing has been agreed to. And Scalise said in an earlier interview leaders would likely incorporate “minor tweaks” into the procedural rule governing floor debate on the underlying bill — if the White House approves.

So far, however, conversations have not sufficiently moved the needle. Hard-liners aren’t budging, continuing resisting renewed calls from Trump and an increasingly aggressive pressure campaign from the administration. That includes a detailed presentation from CIA Director John Ratcliffe at Wednesday morning’s closed-door House GOP Conference meeting on the need for a clean extension.

“Look, he’s the executive, we’re the legislative, and we’re going to see a little bit of conflict between those two today,” Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said Wednesday, referring to the president.

GOP Reps. Michael Cloud of Texas, Andrew Clyde of Georgia and other hard-liners stood up in the GOP Conference meeting to raise their concerns about a clean reauthorization and continued push for overhauling the program. Some Republicans grew irritated that Ratcliffe “filibustered” until close to the end of the meeting’s scheduled conclusion to avoid taking challenging questions, according to four people in the meeting.

Even before the rule vote was postponed, several rank-and-file members said they were not confident the rule would be adopted.

“There are some who will vote against the rule for sure,” said one House Republican granted anonymity to speak candidly. “It’s a math issue.”

Democrats aren’t expected to help Republicans overcome the procedural rule, even though some of them support a reauthorization without policy changes at this time. The top Democrats on the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees — Reps. Jim Himes of Connecticut and Jamie Raskin of Maryland, respectively — discussed a joint proposal for a package of FISA overhaul provisions at their party’s weekly caucus meeting Monday morning, which they plan to attempt to advance if the Republicans’ rule fails, according to two people in the meeting.

A fail safe option, if negotiations don’t yield results soon, is to pursue a very short term clean extension — possibly a few months — to buy more time for talks. White House officials and GOP leaders are trying to avoid that scenario.

Riley Rogerson contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Trending