A House Republican lawmaker has introduced articles of impeachment against Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accusing him of abusing judicial power by blocking the Trump administration’s deportation efforts.
Representative Brandon Gill (R-TX) filed the resolution on Tuesday, claiming that Boasberg’s decision to halt deportations of individuals with alleged ties to a Venezuelan gang constituted a constitutional overreach. “By thwarting President Trump’s lawful efforts to deport violent illegal alien gangsters, Judge Boasberg created a constitutional crisis. He is unfit for judicial office,” Gill wrote in a statement on social media.
🚨 I just introduced Articles of Impeachment against radical activist Judge James Boasberg.
He is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and should be removed from office. pic.twitter.com/MO6UjQ6wBb
— Congressman Brandon Gill (@RepBrandonGill) March 18, 2025
The resolution formally accuses Boasberg of high crimes and misdemeanors, citing an alleged abuse of power in his intervention regarding the president’s authority to enforce immigration law under the Alien Enemies Act. According to the resolution, Boasberg “usurped the role of the Executive and unilaterally took upon himself the power and authority of the President.”
James Boasberg is the slimeball corrupt judge sending 60-year-old non-violent offenders to over a year in jail while trying to protect violent gang criminals from other countries from being deported.
10 guesses on whether James boasberg is a Republican or Democrat?
What are… https://t.co/lsXgViOOZ8
— ChampionCitizen (@ChampionCitizen) March 16, 2025
The impeachment effort stems from Boasberg’s ruling that temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting a group of individuals allegedly affiliated with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, a designated foreign terrorist organization. The ruling resulted in deportation flights being ordered to turn back midair. House Republicans argue that the ruling directly contradicted Supreme Court precedent from Ludecke v. Watkins (1948), which they claim affirms the president’s sole discretion in such matters.
The decision has drawn sharp criticism from conservatives, who argue that judicial overreach has undermined efforts to secure the border. President Trump addressed the issue on his social media platform, Truth Social, early Tuesday morning, calling Boasberg a “Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge” and renewing calls for his impeachment. “This judge, like many Crooked Judges, should be IMPEACHED! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT CRIMINALS IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” Trump wrote.
The resolution’s introduction has sparked debate over judicial accountability and the separation of powers. Gill and other Republican lawmakers contend that impeachment is necessary to maintain checks on judicial authority. “For the past several weeks, we’ve seen several rogue activist judges try to impede the president from exercising not only the mandate voters gave him, but his democratic and constitutional authority to keep the American people safe,” Gill said in an interview with Fox News.
BREAKING: Less than 12 hours after I exposed Judge James Boasberg’s conflict of interest with his daughter Katharine Boasberg, who works for a 501c3 called “Partners For Justice” @PFJ_USA that gives criminal illegal aliens and gang members legal advice,
Katharine Boasberg has… https://t.co/b0E0bW7t4C pic.twitter.com/1BMjQAvLjh— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) March 18, 2025
Gill stated that he intends to consult with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) on how to proceed. “I think the best way to do this…is to go through the judiciary committee, which is where impeachment of judges runs through. I think the more we can stick with that plan, the better,” he said.
In response to the impeachment effort, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. issued a statement emphasizing judicial independence. “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,” Roberts said.
The outcome of the impeachment effort remains uncertain, as it would require a majority vote in the House and a two-thirds vote in the Senate to remove Boasberg from office.
