GOP trying to remove judge who ruled against Trump administration

Donald Trump did as he said he would do on Day One, issuing a slew of executive actions. Over the first month, more than five dozen orders have been issued.

Unfortunately, most of them are now locked up in court battles, with Trump having already taken several losses, something he hopes to rectify by having a judge removed for obstruction. 

Fighting the Freeze

Democrats started to fight back against Trump's orders almost immediately.

One of the orders that was challenged was in regard to the freeze on federal grants, something we knew would be challenged, as Congress had already approved the money.

This is something that worked its way through the courts during the first Trump administration, with the courts ruling that the only way previously approved funds could be blocked was by another act of Congress.

In this case, two dozen Democrat Attorneys General filed suit to block the order.

Unconstitutional

Another order that had been challenged and defeated in the lower courts was Trump's birthright citizenship order.

I support the order, and even stated that the wording of the order was done in a way that might give Trump some hope that it will hold up once it goes before the Supreme Court, but I still only give Trump about a 10% chance of success here.

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell was among those fighting the order, stating, "President Trump does not have the authority to take away constitutional rights."

The order has failed in the lower courts, and Trump's hope now rests with the Supreme Court.

Impeach Them

Republicans, surely at the guidance of Trump, are now looking to remove at least one judge who issued an order that temporarily blocked DOGE, accusing U.S. District Court Judge Paul Engelmayer of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-WI) issued a resolution, which stated, “Paul Engelmayer, as a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, engaged in judicial misconduct when he halted President Donald J. Trump’s Executive order establishing and implementing the President’s Department of Government Efficiency on purely political grounds, demonstrating clear bias and prejudice against the President and the 74,000,000 Americans who voted for him."

The resolution accuses the judge of being a political activist rather than a jurist, saying he "abuses his judicial office" in the process.

I know I am in the minority by saying this, but being president does not give you blanket authority to do what you want. And I am not saying Trump is in the wrong with his order, as I fully support DOGE, but he is going to lose a lot of these battles as he bucks precedents that have been in place for quite some time. Having said that, in this particular case, I cannot wait to see how this all pans out because I believe Trump was very much within his presidential powers to appoint DOGE and Musk as an advisory board.