Consultant Andy Biggs (R-AZ) has filed a decision to take away U.S. District Courtroom Decide James E. Boasberg for failing to uphold the Structure’s “good habits” clause—with out requiring the normal two-thirds Senate vote.
The decision, submitted within the Home of Representatives, alleges Decide Boasberg—at the moment Chief Decide of the highly effective United States District Courtroom for the District of Columbia—knowingly abused his place to intrude with the constitutional authority of President Donald Trump.
The decision declares Decide Boasberg’s conduct a breach of constitutional order, notably his illegal meddling in President Trump’s lawful directive to deport members of Venezuela’s infamous Tren de Aragua gang below the Alien Enemies Act.
On March 15, 2025, Trump issued a proclamation invoking the 1798 law to expel these violent international operatives, citing threats to public security and nationwide safety.
As a substitute of supporting the chief department’s effort to safe the homeland, Boasberg allegedly stepped in to block the deportations—successfully undermining a sitting president’s constitutional authority to defend America from international enemies.
The article of elimination additionally raises grave considerations about Boasberg’s prior conduct as a FISA court docket decide, suggesting that he misused his discretion and did not disclose funds from exterior sources. These actions, Biggs asserts, additional show Boasberg is unfit to serve on the bench.
“James E. Boasberg knowingly prolonged past the bounds of energy of his workplace and unjustly interfered within the execution of international coverage and nationwide safety for partisan functions of halting the implementation of the President’s international coverage and for political acquire,” in accordance with the decision.
Moreover, James E. Boasberg has did not disclose funds obtained from non-federal supply and abused his discretion throughout his time period on the International Intelligence Surveillance Courtroom.”
Now, Rep. Biggs seeks to bypass the cumbersome impeachment course of—sometimes requiring a two-thirds Senate vote—by invoking Congress’s inherent authority below Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution.
It’s a direct shot throughout the bow at activist judges who suppose they’ll trample the desire of the American individuals and the duly-elected President, Donald Trump.
In line with the press release:
Congressman Andy Biggs (R-AZ) launched a decision to take away James Boasberg, Chief Decide of the USA District Courtroom for the District of Columbia, for failure to keep up the usual of fine habits required by the U.S. Structure.
Article III, Part 1 of the Structure offers Congress the authority to ascertain all federal courts inferior to the U.S. Supreme Courtroom, and establishes that judges could solely maintain their positions throughout good habits. This provision is separate and distinct from Congress’s authority to question civil officers for “Treason, Bribery, or different excessive Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
As detailed within the decision, Decide James Boasberg knowingly and unjustly interfered with President Trump’s execution of international coverage and focused President Trump for partisan functions and political acquire. Beneath the Good Conduct Clause, Boasberg’s actions represent misbehavior and topic him to elimination from workplace.
“We can’t stand by whereas activist judges who incorrectly consider they’ve extra authority than the duly-elected President of the USA, impose their very own political agenda on the American individuals,” stated Congressman Biggs.
“I’ve cosponsored resolutions to question Decide Boasberg. His elimination from workplace by way of impeachment, nevertheless, will undoubtedly be blocked by Democrats within the Senate, because it requires a two-thirds majority. My decision, however, asserts, pursuant to Article III, Part 1, that rogue judges could also be eliminated the identical method we verify them—by a easy majority.
“Decide Boasberg abused his judicial authority for political acquire and isn’t in compliance with the constitutional Good Conduct Clause. He should not be permitted to stay in his place. Congress has an obligation to meet the guarantees we’ve made to the American individuals, together with defending the President’s authority to implement our legal guidelines.”
Learn the decision beneath:
