Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is facing a tricky path forward as President Trump and Elon Musk publicly — and persistently — push for the impeachment of the judge who directed flights carrying Venezuelan migrants to be turned around.
Trump ignited a controversial campaign this week when he said U.S. District Judge James Boasberg — whom he dubbed a “troublemaker and agitator” — should be impeached, which Musk and other Republican lawmakers joined in on. Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) quickly heeded the president’s calls, introducing an article of impeachment against Boasberg that charges him with “abuse of power.”
The push, to be sure, has virtually no chance of success, with a number of House moderates casting doubt on the idea, and a supermajority — 67 votes — needed to approve the effort in the Senate. At least 14 Democrats would have to join all Republicans in supporting conviction.
But if Trump and Musk press on with their push for the impeachment proceedings — and if a lawmaker forces a vote on the legislation — Johnson could be pushed into a corner, weighing the importance of appeasing the president against protecting his members from what could be a politically difficult vote.
The Speaker, for his part, is walking that fine line carefully. A Johnson spokesperson told The Hill this week that the top lawmaker is looking forward to “working with the Judiciary Committee as they review all available options under the Constitution to address this urgent matter.”
“Activist judges with political agendas pose a significant threat to the rule of law, equal justice, and the separation of powers,” the spokesperson added.
House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), meanwhile, was more direct. The longtime conservative said “all options are still on the table” when asked by CNN’s Kasie Hunt on Wednesday if Boasberg, an appointee of former President Obama, should be impeached.
“Well, normally, as Chief Justice Roberts has pointed out, the remedy for bad decisions is the appellate court. But it seems to me you may have something a little different here,” Jordan said. “This judge’s decision was so ridiculous. It seems to be political.”
“I think you might have here a judge who’s acting in a political fashion. That is a different question,” he later added. “And so for us Republicans and I think folks on the Judiciary Committee, all options are still on the table. We’re going to do some research. We’re going to dig into this, and we’re going to find out.”
Pressed on if his committee would hold impeachment hearings, Jordan responded: “Everything is on the table, we’re considering all options.”
If the House does eventually move forward with an impeachment vote, Johnson would face an uphill battle to get it over the finish line. With the slim House GOP majority, the Speaker will need near-unanimity in his ranks — and some lawmakers are already casting doubt.
“We shouldn’t impeach judges because they render a decision we disagree with,” Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), the chair of the self-proclaimed pragmatic Main Street Caucus, told The Hill. “The remedy for bad decisions is getting them overturned on appeal.”
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who represents a purple district, sounded a similar note, telling The Hill “We have [a] 236-year tradition of honoring a judge’s decision or use the appeals process.”
“This is part of our Constitution’s separation of powers, and checks and balances. We don’t want to weaken this,” he added. “If the president’s position is right, he’ll win on appeal.”
One House GOP source said “dozens of Republicans behind the scenes have expressed reservations about this approach.”
Boasberg emerged as a bogeyman in GOP circles over the weekend when he blocked the Trump administration from invoking the Alien Enemies Act — a 1798 law — to quickly deport Venezuelan migrants who the White House says are suspected gang members. He ordered the government to halt or turn around flights carrying the migrants.
Boasberg is now demanding the administration turn over information regarding deportation flights that left the U.S. on Saturday to determine if they violated his order. The Justice Department has argued its conduct was in compliance with the decision because the flights had already departed U.S. airspace when the written order was issued.
Trump came out swinging against Boasberg on Tuesday, labeling him a “Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge” and calling for his ouster.
“This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
Trump later fundraised on Boasberg’s impeachment over email.
The New York Times reported Wednesday that Musk has donated the legal maximum amount of money he can to the campaigns of seven Republicans who endorsed judicial impeachments or have demanded action in response to rulings against the Trump administration — including Gill, the first-term lawmaker who introduced an impeachment resolution against Boasberg accusing him of “abuse of power.”
“Chief Judge Boasberg, in violation of his oath of office, did knowingly and willfully use his judicial position to advance political gain while interfering with the President’s constitutional prerogatives and enforcement of the law,” the resolution reads.
Just 15 federal judges have been impeached, according to the Federal Judicial Center, with the most recent being U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr., who was impeached for accepting bribes and making false statements under penalty of perjury.
It remains unclear if Gill or one of the resolution’s five co-sponsors plan to make the measure privileged, which would require leadership to move on it. If someone takes that route, Johnson would likely move to refer the resolution to the Judiciary Committee — which oversees impeachment — or move to table the measure, effectively killing it.
In June 2023, for example, under then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the House voted to refer articles of impeachment against then-President Biden to the Judiciary and Homeland Security committees.
But even that path could be less than ideal for some Republicans who do not think impeachment is the right course of action for the current situation.
“I hate when a partisan district court judge gums up the system with a ruling that is certain to be overturned,” a moderate House Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss the topic, told The Hill. “Both sides’ judges do it, and it has to stop. Congress should put a stop to it. Just not sure impeachment is the right answer.”
Republicans, meanwhile, are eyeing impeachment efforts against other judges who have ruled against the Trump administration. Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) introduced articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, who blocked Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing the Treasury Department’s payment systems.
Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) has introduced articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge John Bates, who ordered federal health agencies to restore online datasets taken down after Trump signed an executive order forbidding the government from promoting “gender ideology,” and U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, who ordered the release of foreign aid payments owned under some existing contracts.
Jordan — who leads the committee that oversees impeachment — said if not impeachment, there could be “another legislative remedy” to push back on the judges that have drawn their ire, pointing to the No Rogue Rulings Act, which would place limitations on district court judges issuing orders providing injunctive relief decisions that affect the entire country outside their districts.
The House Judiciary Committee advanced the legislation earlier this month.
“We passed it through the committee,” Jordan said on CNN. “We’ll try to look to pass it on the House floor and move it through the process.”
