Senate Republicans like their chances at impeaching judges — House Republicans aren’t so sure

WASHINGTON (CN) — House Republicans on Wednesday were once again noncommittal on renewed efforts to impeach and remove a pair of federal district court judges who lawmakers have for months accused of abusing their offices to oppose the Trump administration’s agenda.

The impeachment malaise, which mirrors Republican feelings about previous attempts to remove jurists who’ve ruled against the White House, comes even as the Senate lawmaker leading this latest push expressed optimism last week that the House would come around.

Republicans in both chambers have demanded that Congress impeach U.S. District Judges James Boasberg and Deborah Boardman, claiming that the federal judges in D.C. and Maryland had taken actions from the bench which violated the judicial code of conduct.

Boasberg, lawmakers claimed, unfairly authorized non-disclosure orders concealing special counsel Jack Smith’s efforts to obtain phone toll records of sitting senators as part of his probe into 2020 election interference. And Republicans have accused Boardman of handing down a lenient sentence to the person convicted of attempting to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2022.

Members of Congress have introduced articles of impeachment against both judges.

And during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week, Texas Senator Ted Cruz — the upper chamber’s leading voice for impeaching Boasberg and Boardman — claimed that he thought the House would vote to approve articles of impeachment against the judges.

“Their decisions and their misconduct are the most indefensible,” Cruz told Courthouse News at the time. “They’re the clearest deviations from their oath of office, they are the most lawless.”

But top House lawmakers were less enthusiastic about the impeachment push, saying Wednesday that there were other options for opposing what they still view to be the judges’ improper conduct and cautioning that a congressional impeachment inquiry would require further investigation.

“Everything’s on the table,” said Ohio Representative Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. “We’re going to look at everything … all the tools that we have to let some of these judges know that the president and Congress are separate but equal branches of government.”

Jordan did not say whether he would back an impeachment inquiry. He did, however, point out that Republicans had taken other legislative action to clamp down on federal judges — including a budget amendment offered Wednesday by Texas Representative Chip Roy aimed at restricting the D.C. District’s funding in response to Boasberg’s conduct.

California Representative Darrell Issa, who chairs the Judiciary Committee’s courts-focused subpanel, offered a check on Senate optimism about the success of an impeachment inquiry, especially against Boasberg.

“The standard for impeachment is not what you see in the press,” said Issa. “The standard for impeachment is a real, diligent process.”

The California Republican argued that while he and his colleagues had a right to be angry with the D.C. judge, the standard for impeaching a jurist with a lifetime appointment was “rare” and that it would require “really bad behavior.”

Issa added that the process for impeachment was complicated and required a full investigation — pointing out that such a move required more than a simple vote.

“It’s a very low bar to send out a letter,” he said. “To inquire … the next steps are taken very seriously. Anyone that predicts that it’s somehow quick and easy is missing the point that we have these other steps.”

Efforts to impeach federal judges, the congressman concluded, go beyond “political winds.”

“To get the majority of the majority means that we have to take those steps — and those steps better show something that brings us together as Republicans, at a minimum,” said Issa. “Impeachment is political in nature, but it’s also factual, and if you don’t have the facts and they’re not solid, political winds should not cause you to do something for which you don’t have the evidence.”

It’s unclear whether House Republicans plan to move forward with a full-fledged impeachment inquiry against either Boasberg or Boardman.

Roy, whose proposed budget amendment was defeated on the House floor Wednesday evening, told Courthouse News that the language was a “shot” at reminding federal judges that Congress controls their funding.

“We created it, we can defund it,” said the Texas Republican. “We can check them if we think they’re not doing the right thing.”

If approved, Roy’s amendment would have slashed funding for the D.C. federal district court by 20%. The measure also would have cut staff salaries for Boasberg’s office, as well as for employees working for Boardman in the District of Maryland.

It’s not the first time House Republicans have been reticent to back impeaching federal judges under the second Trump administration. Issa previously distanced himself from the idea last spring, after top Trump advisers — including billionaire Elon Musk — called on Congress to remove Boasberg.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said at the time that he had a high bar for impeachment and framed other legislative actions as a “silver bullet” for addressing what many GOP lawmakers have framed as political activism from the bench.

Congress early last year passed a bill severely restricting the scope of nationwide injunctions, a judicial tool used repeatedly by federal courts to block the Trump administration from carrying out some of its most sweeping executive action. Jordan on Wednesday again held up the nationwide injunctions legislation as an example of GOP action on the issue.

Throughout U.S. history, Congress has only impeached a handful of federal judges and removed even fewer. Just eight jurists have been shown the door by lawmakers, stemming primarily from criminal activity.

Follow @BenjaminSWeiss