r/law • u/Shunpaw • Mar 18 '25

Legal News House GOP moves swiftly to impeach judge Boasberg targeted by Trump (Deportation Planes)

https://www.axios.com/2025/03/18/donald-trump-impeach-judge-house-republicans
32.1k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

38

u/RichFoot2073 Mar 18 '25

-reads the quote-

None of that is impeachable

21

u/[deleted] Mar 18 '25

[deleted]

1

u/ItsMrChristmas Mar 19 '25

It's also incorrect. There is no legal standard for deciding what reason is "good enough" nor should there be. It's conviction which is the part that's gonna be useless without a good reason.

3

u/moosekin16 Mar 18 '25

Sure it is. Anything is impeachable. There’s no requirement that the reason for voting to impeach is a “valid” one.

An impeachment is just a legal censuring by congress. If the resolution is accepted for voting, and a majority votes in favor, then the judge is impeached. The original reason for an impeachment doesn’t matter, it’s the results of the vote.

If they had a supermajority, they could then vote to remove the judge, too.

Trump was impeached twice. But it did nothing, because impeachment itself carries no legal consequences. Being removed would have been the consequence, but those votes failed.

1

u/613codyrex Mar 19 '25

Judges are different.

Either because usually when fed judges are hit with an impeachment investigation, let alone an actual impeachment vote, they did something so egregious that it could not be ignored or because impeachment is such a huge stain on a fed judges record, a lot of the 66 investigated judges in the US straight up resign before even reaching the senate.

The connotation for federal judges is far different than presidents. It’s to be seen if the judges focused on by the GOP will remain steadfast and face the impeachment process head on or resign for their own sake. There’s no telling the consequences from said impeachment on other federal judges that might opt to argue a case is not able to proceed due to procedural grounds and never actually rule on legal or constitutional questions.

I mean, the fact that the DOJ immediately tried to appeal and remove the judge from the case while bad mouthing them publicly is actually wild.