Rep. Biggs Targets Rogue Judge With Bold New Move [WATCH]

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., introduced a resolution on Monday aimed at removing U.S. District Judge James Boasberg from the federal bench, citing a violation of the Constitution’s “good behavior” requirement for federal judges.

The move comes in response to Boasberg’s ruling that blocked President Donald Trump’s effort to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

Congress must put a stop to rogue judges attempting to legislate for the entire nation. pic.twitter.com/e8I4vm4HqY

— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) April 1, 2025

Elon Musk Called This Financial News ‘Terrifying’

Biggs’ resolution argues that Judge Boasberg’s actions in halting deportations of members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua represented an abuse of judicial authority and a direct interference with the president’s foreign policy powers.

The congressman is proposing a new approach that bypasses the traditional impeachment process, which requires a two-thirds majority in the Senate, by invoking Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution.

“Most Americans believe that there is lifetime tenure for a federal judge. That unless impeached, a federal judge can serve until death,” Biggs told Just the News.

“But lifetime tenure is not guaranteed, nor mentioned, in the Constitution. Article III, Section 1 permits a federal judge to serve only ‘during good behavior.’”

Federal judges do not have lifetime tenure.

They can remain on their bench only when they’re engaged in good conduct.

If they fail to regulate themselves, Congress must step in and remove corrupt judges. pic.twitter.com/oo1fdOORKN

— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) March 26, 2025

FREE Concealed Carry Gun Laws & Reciprocity Map

Boasberg, who presides in Washington, D.C., ordered planes carrying the alleged gang members en route to El Salvador to return to the United States, effectively blocking the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act.

Biggs argued that the judge’s actions went beyond the scope of judicial review and improperly intervened in executive branch authority.

The resolution reads, in part, “The Constitution grants the President broad and expansive powers over the conduct of foreign policy and to ensure national security against foreign threats.

” It continues, “Boasberg knowingly interfered with the President’s execution of foreign policy by ordering the return of members of a designated foreign terrorist organization to the United States.”

Biggs stated that his resolution is based on the belief that some judges have been making politically motivated rulings, stepping beyond their districts, and failing to recuse themselves from cases where conflicts of interest exist.

“Maybe, however, firing such a judge could be the answer,” Biggs said.

“It would certainly be specific deterrence that would prevent that type of misconduct from such a judge. And it would provide general deterrence in that all other federal judges would think more about applying the law to the case rather than attempting to twist the law so that the judge can attack a political adversary.”

Boasberg is one of several federal judges who have blocked portions of the Trump administration’s policy agenda, including efforts to restructure federal agencies and challenge birthright citizenship.

Judge Boasberg’s willful interference with President Trump’s enforcement of immigration law is an abuse of judicial power.

I’ve introduced a resolution to remove him from office for violating the Good Behavior Clause. pic.twitter.com/ggMQnf1mD2

— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) April 1, 2025

Biggs is not alone in calling for judicial reform. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has proposed a three-pronged strategy that includes limiting nationwide injunctions, using Congress’s appropriations power to restrict judicial activism, and holding hearings on judicial conduct.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley also introduced legislation on Monday to restrict the authority of federal judges to cases within their geographic jurisdiction and to the parties involved.

Grassley’s bill aims to limit the ability of individual judges to issue restraining orders that apply nationwide.

In the House, Republicans have filed articles of impeachment against at least three judges, including Boasberg. However, Biggs said that his method might avoid the need for supermajority support in the Senate.

“The Senate also confirms judicial nominations by a simple majority vote of 51. The finding that a judge has violated terms of ‘good behavior’ should also be affirmed by a simple majority of votes in the Senate and House,” Biggs said.

Legal scholars have long interpreted impeachment as the only constitutional method to remove a federal judge.

Still, some have challenged that view, pointing to the phrasing in Article III, Section 1 as a possible alternative path.

Biggs said that if members of Congress agree with his interpretation, it would allow them to act collectively and remove judges they believe have exceeded their constitutional authority.

“Article III, Section 1 will allow us to collectively say, ‘You’re fired’ to those judges who have forfeited their tenure on the bench by abusing their power,” he said.

American Made Patriotic Apparel – Save 15% with Promo Code MERICA

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.