Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
“Chief Justice John Roberts rebuked President Donald Trump on Tuesday for urging the impeachment of a federal judge… In a rare statement, Roberts wrote: ‘For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision…
“Roberts' statement followed Trump's call in a social media post on Tuesday for the impeachment of a federal judge. Washington-based U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered the administration on Saturday to halt the removal of alleged Venezuelan gang members…
“‘I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!’ Trump wrote on Tuesday. Trump also called the judge a ‘Radical Left Lunatic.’” Reuters
Here’s our recent coverage of the legal case. The Flip Side
The left is critical of Roberts for not pushing back against Trump’s policies, and worries that Trump’s rhetoric will inspire attacks on judges.
“More often than not, the law does not constrain [Trump] in any meaningful sense. The First Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom of religion did not actually prevent him from instituting a Muslim ban. The Fourteenth Amendment’s ban on insurrectionists holding elected office did not actually prohibit him from running for president again. And, of course, sacred separation-of-powers principles mean that presidents cannot be prosecuted for crimes…
“As he demonstrated during the Biden administration, Roberts knows how to check a president when he feels like it. But he has little interest in doing so these days, because the current president’s policy agenda is one with which Roberts largely agrees. As his statement’s emphasis on the primacy of the ‘normal appellate review process’ suggests, when their preferences diverge, it is mostly a difference of opinion about strategy.”
Jay Willis, Balls and Strikes
“The statement is notable for what it leaves out: any acknowledgment of the substantive dispute in the case, which is whether Trump is defying court orders. Roberts seems more concerned about rhetorical attacks on the personal integrity or employment status of judges than he does with systemic attacks on the judiciary as a whole…
“In his end-of-year report last year, Roberts wrote that ‘elected officials from across the political spectrum have raised the specter of open disregard for federal court rulings. These dangerous suggestions, however sporadic, must be soundly rejected.’ These suggestions are no longer sporadic, and they are largely coming from one party, yet Roberts’s focus now is on the personal.”
David A. Graham, The Atlantic
“The appropriate response for an administration that doesn’t like the outcome of a legal dispute is to appeal it. Let me add that it’s also inappropriate for a president to call a judge he disagrees with ‘radical Left Lunatic… troublemaker and agitator… and crooked.’ These are the kinds of words that can lead to threats on a judge’s life…
“Since the end of January, [Elon] Musk has blasted judges in more than 30 posts on his social media site X… After [an adverse ruling by Judge Amir Ali], an X user called for him to be beheaded. Another questioned ‘why so few judges are hanged.’ One posted a picture of a noose… One suggested that ‘US patriots fire upon him.’…
“Judges are expressing mounting alarm over their physical safety. Several judges describe phone calls promising personal harm to them and their families. [Two federal judges] are getting extra security after their rulings blocked Musk’s so-called DOGE from accessing sensitive Treasury Department data… How will this end? Will they stop when a federal judge is murdered?”
Robert Reich, Substack
The right is skeptical of impeaching judges, and accuses Roberts of ignoring similar rhetoric from Democrats.
The right is skeptical of impeaching judges, and accuses Roberts of ignoring similar rhetoric from Democrats.
“Roberts is correct, as far as he goes. There has been a consensus that judicial impeachments should be limited to incapacity or corruption, and that has largely held up. Until recently, though, it was also a consensus that presidential impeachments should involve incapacity or corruption too, and… that hasn't held up nearly as well for the last 30 years…
“That loss of confidence has nothing to do with the Supreme Court or John Roberts. However, the plague of district courts enacting nationwide TROs to block executive authority does. Roberts and his colleagues could intervene in such cases more quickly…
“The court could also require that such TROs come from the appellate level or in other three-judge combinations to put an end to judge-shopping, which everyone uses as a tactic these days. Thus far, though, the court has done nothing to curtail the lawfare that has been engaged to keep Trump from the full exercise of his legitimate authority and jurisdiction.”
Ed Morrissey, Hot Air
“Democrats in the Biden years tried to politicize the judiciary, even proposing legislation to pack the Supreme Court. Now Republicans are getting into this disreputable racket, calling for the impeachment of judges who rule against President Trump. On Tuesday [Roberts] rightly rejected such calls…
“His statement is important because it points to the appeals process available if lower-court judges rule against the Trump Administration. Republicans have a point that left-wing plaintiffs are hunting for judges favorable to their views…
“In Mr. Trump’s first term that’s how judges stopped his travel ban—for a time. But the case made its way to the Supreme Court, which ruled that his ban was a proper exercise of executive power… If impeachment is the remedy for every adverse judicial ruling, we wouldn’t have a judiciary left.”
Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal
“Last year Representative AOC and other members of Congress introduced articles of impeachment against Justices Thomas and Alito. As best as I can recall, Roberts said nothing about this… Likewise, in 2023, Senator Ron Wyden told President Biden to ‘ignore’ any ruling from Judge Matt Kacsmaryk concerning mifepristone… Yet Roberts did not say a word about this in his end-of-year address or anywhere else…
“The Constitutional Crisis is a coin with two sides. Trump causes judges to overact, and judges cause Trump to overreact. Any resolution must be bilateral, not unilateral. Roberts could de-escalate the situation by promptly reversing some of these out-of-control lower court rulings. But instead, he would rather sit on his hands and pontificate.”
Josh Blackman, Volokh Conspiracy
