Republican leaders eye extreme alternatives to impeaching federal judges

[LetMyPeopleVote]

Congress’ GOP leaders don’t see the point in trying to impeach judges, but they have some dramatic alternatives in mind that are nearly as radical.
https://bsky.app/profile/stevebenen.com/post/3ll7vj6jzwc2m

As Republicans rage over judges who dare to rule in ways the White House doesn't like, House Speaker Mike Johnson noted this morning that Congress has the authority to "eliminate an entire district court."

This sort of talk is quite bonkers.

Link to tweet

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/republican-leaders-eye-extreme-alternatives-impeaching-federal-judges-rcna198004

On Capitol Hill, however, GOP leaders don’t seem overly eager to launch impeachment crusades against judges who’ve done nothing wrong, and who would never be removed by a two-thirds majority in the Senate.

So, what’s a partisan congressional leader to do? The answer, evidently, is to consider some radical alternatives to impeachment. Punchbowl News’ Jake Sherman, an MSNBC contributor, spoke with House Speaker Mike Johnson, and the Louisiana Republican shared one possible approach:

We do have authority over the federal courts. As you know, we can, we can eliminate an entire district court. ... We have power, funding over the courts and all these other things. But desperate times call for desperate measures and Congress is going to act so stay tuned for that.

Sherman noted soon after that the House speaker clarified that he didn’t mean this as a direct threat. “I’m trying to illustrate we have a broad scope of authority over the courts,” Johnson added.

And as part of this “broad scope” of congressional authority over the courts, what’s on the table? Quite a bit, actually. Over the course of the last week or so, Republican lawmakers have opened the door to a series of possible alternatives to judicial impeachments. GOP officials are considering:

Legislation to bar district court judges from issuing nationwide injunctions.

Blocking funding for district courts that issued rulings that Trump doesn’t like.

Holding House and Senate hearings to focus attention on judges who’ve issued rulings that Trump doesn’t like.

It was against this backdrop that the House speaker brought up his belief that Congress could “eliminate an entire district court.”

[MacKasey]

1. I know the House can impeach a judge but only the Senate can convict

And to eliminate a district wouldn't the Senate also have to approve that??

Johnson can I just do it in the house, correct?

[drray23]

2. Correct. Every law has to be voted by both house and senate.

It would never pass the senate.

[Igel]

3. Congress would have to do it.

Presumably with presidential signature on the bill, but I don't know if that was required when Congress established the lower courts.

The Constitution stipulates one Supreme Court--and allows Congress to establish lower courts. It does not establish anything but the Supreme Court. Congress cannot abolish that court.

I rather imagine the idea was that the Supreme Court would handle matters federal and state courts would handle all the rest.