Ever notice how some judges seem to think they’re running the country these days? It’s become an all-too-familiar pattern: President Trump implements a policy to protect Americans, and faster than you can say “order in the court,” an activist judge swoops in with a nationwide injunction. But they’re not just opposing a president – they’re thumbing their noses at the millions of Americans who voted for these very reforms. Case in point: Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee who recently blocked Trump from deporting suspected Venezuelan gang members. That’s right – hardened, violent criminal aliens get to stay in America because one unelected judge said so. Can you believe it?

Traditionally, removing such a judge requires impeachment – a process requiring a two-thirds Senate majority that’s about as likely as finding a moderate Democrat in Congress these days. But here’s where things get interesting: one sharp-eyed Republican congressman has discovered a constitutional workaround that could change everything. Turns out our Founding Fathers may have left us a solution hiding in plain sight all along.

Constitutional Kryptonite for Activist Judges

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) unveiled a bold resolution this week that bypasses the impeachment process entirely. Instead of the nearly impossible two-thirds Senate majority, Biggs is invoking Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution, which requires federal judges to maintain “good behavior” to keep their lifetime appointments. His resolution would remove Judge Boasberg for his “failure to maintain the standard of good behavior” – using the same simple majority vote process used to confirm judges in the first place.

From ‘The Daily Wire’:

“Judge Boasberg abused his judicial authority for political gain and is not in compliance with the constitutional Good Behavior Clause. He must not be permitted to remain in his position,” Biggs said in a statement. “Congress has a duty to fulfill the promises we’ve made to the American people, including defending the President’s authority to enforce our laws.”

This isn’t Boasberg’s first controversial ruling, either. The Obama appointee has been involved with the Russiagate scandal and is currently assigned to a Signalgate lawsuit. His blocking of deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act represents what many conservatives see as a clear overstepping of judicial boundaries into presidential authority over immigration enforcement.

Bench-Slapped: Congress Fights Back

The Biggs resolution comes as House GOP leadership is moving ahead with broader efforts to rein in judicial overreach. The House is expected to vote this week on legislation specifically designed to limit the ability of federal judges to issue those pesky nationwide injunctions that have repeatedly hamstrung Trump administration initiatives.

“We cannot stand by while activist judges who incorrectly believe they have more authority than the duly-elected President of the United States, impose their own political agenda on the American people,” Biggs declared in his statement announcing the resolution.

Even Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has weighed in, issuing a rare statement emphasizing that the “normal appellate review process exists” for the purpose of challenging judicial decisions – a gentle reminder that judges blocking presidential actions isn’t how the system was designed to work.

Putting Judges In Their Place (Constitutionally Speaking)

What’s most fascinating about Biggs’ approach is how it returns to fundamental constitutional principles. Rather than playing politics, it simply applies the Constitution’s own standard: judges serve during “good behavior,” not indefinitely regardless of their actions. The Framers understood the danger of an unaccountable judiciary and provided this remedy for precisely such situations.

For too long, Americans have watched as unelected judges substitute their policy preferences for the law, especially when it comes to immigration enforcement. If Biggs’ resolution succeeds, it could restore proper constitutional balance and remind the judiciary that while they interpret the law, they don’t make it – and certainly don’t get to override the president’s core constitutional authorities.

Key Takeaways:

• Rep. Andy Biggs introduced a resolution using the Constitution’s “good behavior” clause to remove Judge Boasberg with only a simple majority vote.
• Judge Boasberg’s block on deporting Venezuelan gang members exemplifies how activist judges are thwarting the will of American voters.
• This constitutional approach could restore proper separation of powers and presidential authority over immigration enforcement.

Source: Daily Wire