California judge who blocked Trump National Guard order hit with impeachment resolution
FIRST ON FOX: A Republican lawmaker is filing impeachment articles against a judge who temporarily blocked President Donald Trump's control of the National Guard in California during this month's riots in Los Angeles.
Rep. Randy Fine, R-La., is filing a resolution to remove U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer from the bench on Friday.
He told Fox News Digital that he felt the judge's decision was "political."
"The goal is to get judges to do their jobs. If we're not going to try to hold accountable the ones that aren't, then they have no incentive to stop," Fine said.
Jd Vance Rails Against Newsom, La Mayor For Declaring 'Open Season On Federal Law Enforcement'
It comes as Republicans continue to push back on Democratic officials trying to block Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration throughout the country.
Read On The Fox News App
The days-long riots in Los Angeles were spurred by ICE raids in Hispanic and Latino neighborhoods, leading to activists clashing with law enforcement and burning cars as a sign of resistance.
Trump, accusing California's progressive officials of not doing enough to stop the situation, bypassed Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom to order the National Guard into Los Angeles to restore order.
Critics of the move said it needlessly escalated an already tense situation, and accused Trump and his allies of exaggerating the violence.
Breyer issued a temporary order blocking Trump's deployment of federal troops earlier this month, however, in response to a lawsuit brought by California.
"At this early stage of the proceedings, the Court must determine whether the President followed the congressionally mandated procedure for his actions. He did not," the court opinion said.
"His actions were illegal—both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith."
Breyer's ruling was quashed last week when a three-judge panel on the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that it was within Trump's authority to federalize the California National Guard.
Breyer is just the latest judge to be brought under House GOP scrutiny after several Trump executive actions got held up in court.
Trump Scores Major Win Against Newsom In Battle For National Guard Control
Trump allies have called for the impeachment of multiple judges, though House GOP leadership has made clear there's little appetite to follow through on such moves – particularly when removal by the Senate is unlikely.
Fine acknowledged the long odds but insisted the resolution was a potent messaging tool.
"I think it's worth doing. I don't know that we can pass it, I don't know that the Senate would remove him from office, but I think failing to avail ourselves of the remedies that the framers intended was a mistake," Fine said.Original article source: California judge who blocked Trump National Guard order hit with impeachment resolution
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
15 minutes ago
- CNN
Senate barrels toward weekend vote on Trump agenda as GOP support still in limbo
President Donald Trump's push to pass his massive agenda in the Senate is hanging by thread as GOP leaders barrel toward a critical vote this weekend that, as of Friday night, is still short of the support to pass. Just hours after Senate Majority Leader John Thune informed senators they would take a critical first vote on Saturday, a key GOP centrist senator warned he would vote against proceeding to the package unless there are major changes – and several other holdouts are uncertain on how they'll land. That warning shot came from Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who is up for reelection next November and has been one of the most vocal critics of the Medicaid cuts used to help pay for Trump's tax cuts and spending cuts package. Speaking to reporters Friday, Tillis again raised concerns over the bill's 'fundamentals' and cuts to Medicaid and suggested his vote wouldn't change unless the measure 'transforms radically overnight.' Losing Tillis on Saturday's expected procedural vote – which will be closely watched by Trump – would be a major blow to Senate GOP leaders, who can only afford to lose three Republican votes to advance the bill. Thune and GOP leaders have spent months building to this moment, racing to draft the bill as quickly as possible in an effort to ensure Trump's agenda is on his desk by the Fourth of July. If the bill fails its first procedural vote on Saturday, GOP leaders will have to retool the package, amounting to a huge setback for Trump. And it's not just about that Independence Day timeline: GOP leaders fear that any delay in passing Trump's agenda would embolden the party's critics to seek more changes – which could lead their fragile coalition to fall apart. Already, outspoken fiscal hawk Sen. Rand Paul is planning to vote against it over the plan's inclusion of a $5 trillion debt-limit increase. And Tillis is not the only Republican threatening to oppose the bill over the proposed cuts to Medicaid. Sens. Josh Hawley, Lisa Murkowski, Jerry Moran and Susan Collins have all made similar remarks as they've worked with leadership to trim those provisions. But simply restoring that Medicaid funding may not be enough to win Thune those votes on the floor – it could also cost him votes among Senate GOP hardliners. Sen. Ron Johnson has railed on how the bill is projected to balloon the budget deficit, and another fiscal hawk, Sen. Mike Lee, has suggested he and Johnson along with Sen. Rick Scott could vote as a bloc on Saturday. None have yet to say how they'll vote on the key initial procedural vote Saturday. If all goes to plan, Senate leaders will land the 51 GOP votes to formally begin debating Trump's agenda and then tee up one of the chamber's storied traditions: a series of round-the-clock amendment votes known as vote-a-rama. Democrats will use this overnight session to push on any number of GOP weak points on the bill, particularly Medicaid and other safety net programs. The Senate could then vote on final passage sometime in the middle of the night Saturday or Sunday morning. And if successful, the House would return mid-week to take up the bill with the hope of Trump signing it at the White House on July 4. One of the biggest hurdles for Republicans is the race to rewrite text in compliance with the Senate's complex budget rules, which are governed by the nonpartisan parliamentarian. In recent days, the parliamentarian has ruled against key GOP provisions – from the so-called provider tax, which helps states fund their Medicaid programs to some provisions of a government spectrum auction. That forces the Senate GOP to dial back those provisions, or else Trump's bill would be subject to a Democratic filibuster. Several Republicans said Friday night they need to see the final bill text – which has not been released – before judging whether they would open debate on the sweeping measure. 'I don't have the bill, how can I vote on something I don't know' what's in it, Johnson said. Hawley, who has been deeply concerned about Medicaid cuts, also said the vote hinges on what's in the bill: 'Got to see the text.' Senate GOP leaders hope to release a mostly final version of the bill Friday night or Saturday morning, but the full version may not be ready before the anticipated Saturday vote to open debate, since the Senate Finance Committee is still furiously working to make sure its language complies with the budget rules. The Finance provisions are key because of both tax and health provisions – specifically, Medicaid. 'I still don't have final language from Finance yet, which obviously is of tremendous concern to me given the Medicaid provisions,' Collins said. Multiple GOP senators dismissed concerns about speeding ahead with the vote without final text in hand. 'We discussed this thing ad nauseam,' Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno said, estimating that Republicans have met on this bill for 'thousands' of hours so far this year. 'The final tax is not out. But we know where we are going.' Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri added: 'When you have legislation like this, you're going to have things you need to work through until the very end.' This story has been updated with additional details.
The Hill
40 minutes ago
- The Hill
House Democrats not convinced Iran nuclear capabilities wiped
The Big Story A House briefing from Trump administration officials on last weekend's strikes against Iranian nuclear sites has done little to mollify the concerns of Democrats, who say they were presented little evidence that the attacks will prevent Tehran from producing nuclear weapons. © Greg Nash Skeptical Democrats had gone into the briefing with two pressing questions: Did Iran pose an imminent threat to Americans, thereby justifying President Trump's move to launch the strikes without congressional approval? And did the attacks 'obliterate' Iran's capacity to make nuclear weapons, as Trump has claimed? Leaving the closed-door gathering, Democrats said they got satisfactory answers to neither question. 'I would say that that particular briefing left me with more concerns and a true lack of clarity on how we are defining the mission and the success of it,' said Rep. Katherine Clark (Mass.), the Democratic whip. Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.), a former nuclear physicist, said the U.S. strikes likely knocked out Iran's centrifuges and other infrastructure required to enrich uranium in the future. But there's no evidence, he said, that the attacks destroyed Iran's existing stockpiles of enriched uranium. If those are intact, he warned, Iran could still produce weapons with the strength of a Hiroshima bomb in 'a very small breakout time.' 'The goal of this mission, from the start, was to secure or destroy that material,' he said. 'That's where they're hiding the ball. And that's what we have to keep our eyes on.' Friday's House briefing came six days after Trump ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites in an effort to dismantle Tehran's ability to produce nuclear weapons. The briefing was conducted by top administration officials — including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Secretary of State Marco Rubio — who had also briefed Senate lawmakers a day earlier. Trump has repeatedly said the mission was an unqualified success, 'obliterating' Iran's nuclear capacity and setting the program back by years. And the president's GOP allies in the Capitol echoed that message after the briefing. 'It is clear, everyone can see by the videos, that these massive ordinance penetrating bombs did the job,' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said. 'I think their key facilities have been disabled, and I think Iran is now a long time away from doing what they might have done before this very successful operation.' A preliminary report from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) reached different conclusions, finding that the strikes set back Iran's nuclear program by months, rather than years. More recent statements from the CIA and Trump's head of national intelligence have disputed the DIA report, creating mixed messages from the administration about the success of the mission. Read the full report at Welcome to The Hill's Defense & National Security newsletter, I'm Ellen Mitchell — your guide to the latest developments at the Pentagon, on Capitol Hill and beyond. Did someone forward you this newsletter? Subscribe here. Essential Reads How policy will affect defense and national security now and inthe future: Iran's foreign minister: Israel had to run to 'daddy' Iran 'showed the world that the Israeli regime had NO Choice but to RUN to 'Daddy' to avoid being flattened out by our missiles,' wrote Seyeb Abbas Araghchi, Iran's Foreign Minister, on X. This comes amid a back and forth between Iran and the U.S. after the supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei spoke for the first time since the U.S. strikes. 'My congratulations on our dear Iran's victory over the US regime,' … Senate blocks Iran war powers resolution The Senate blocked an effort Friday to prevent President Trump from taking future military action against Iran without authorization from Congress, less than a week after he directed strikes aimed at the country's nuclear capabilities. Senators voted 47-53 largely along party lines against the war powers resolution. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was the lone GOP lawmaker to vote with Democrats. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), … Schiff: 'Too many unknowns' to claim 'victory' in stopping Iran nuclear weapons Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Friday it's 'premature' for anyone to be claiming that Iran will not try to continue its nuclear program. 'The Iranian regime had not made a decision to build a bomb, was not pursuing the mechanism of a bomb, even though it was enriching uranium,' he said in Friday comments on ABC News Live. Over the past week, there has been heavy debate over whether the U.S. strikes in Iran on June 21 … McConnell: Trump has 'some pretty rabid isolationists over at' DOD Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) took a swipe at President Trump's national security team in a rare interview as part of a recent pattern of public comments urging the president to consider military intervention in Iran and elsewhere more favorably. 'He's got some pretty rabid isolationists over at [the Department of Defense] — you could argue the vice president is in that group,' the former Senate Republican leader told Politico. … On Our Radar Upcoming things we're watching on our beat: In Other News Branch out with a different read from The Hill: Senators diverge sharply on damage done by Iran strikes after classified briefing WASHINGTON (AP) — Senators emerged from a classified briefing Thursday with sharply diverging assessments of President Donald Trump's bombing of three Iranian nuclear sites, with Republicans calling the mission a clear success and Democrats expressing deep skepticism. CIA Director John Ratcliffe, … On Tap Monday Events in and around the defense world: What We're Reading News we've flagged from other outlets: Trending Today Two key stories on The Hill right now: GOP leader sets Saturday vote on Trump 'big, beautiful bill' despite Republican pushback Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told Senate Republicans to expect to see the legislative text of the budget reconciliation package on Friday … Read more Trump approval underwater, voters say US is on wrong track: Poll President Trump's approval rating is underwater and a majority of voters believe the country is on the wrong track, according to a poll released Friday. … Read more Opinions in The Hill Op-eds related to defense & national security submitted to The Hill: Check out The Hill's Defense page for the latest coverage. You're all caught up. See you next time! Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here
New York Post
44 minutes ago
- New York Post
Birthright citizenship remains law of the land — for now — despite SCOTUS ruling
Birthright citizenship remains a fact of life in the US — for now — following the Supreme Court's ruling Friday limiting judges' ability to issue universal injunctions halting executive action. Moments after the 6-3 ruling, the Trump administration announced plans to move forward with the president's Day One executive order redefining the 14th Amendment's promise that '[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.' 'Thanks to this decision, we can now promptly file to proceed with numerous policies that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis, and some of the cases we're talking about would be ending birthright citizenship, which now comes to the fore,' President Trump said during a rare appearance in the White House briefing room. Advertisement The Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling did not judge the birthright citizenship question on its merits. Eric Kayne/ZUMA / 'That was meant for the babies of slaves. It wasn't meant for people trying to scam the system and come into the country on a vacation.' 'Yes, birthright citizenship will be decided in October in the next session by the Supreme Court,' Attorney General Pam Bondi affirmed moments later, even though the high court has yet to finalize its argument schedule and no cases related to the executive order have been picked for review by the justices. Advertisement In an opinion authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the court ruled that the practice of a single district judge issuing a nationwide ruling 'likely exceed' the authority laid out by the Judiciary Act of 1789. Notably, the court did not decide whether Trump's actual order was constitutional. 'If there's a birthright citizenship case in Oregon, it will only affect the plaintiff in Oregon, not the entire country,' was how Bondi explained the ruling. Trump's order would limit US citizenship to children who have at least one parent who is a US citizen or lawful permanent resident. Advertisement The action was enjoined three days after Trump signed it by a Seattle federal judge, who called the move 'blatantly unconstitutional.' President Trump said the administration now can go forward with 'numerous policies that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis.' On Friday afternoon, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a fresh class-action lawsuit challenging the birthright citizenship order, a legal maneuver which must meet certain requirements before getting a hearing. 'This new case seeks protection for all families in the country, filling the gaps that may be left by the existing litigation,' the organization said in a press release. Advertisement The 22 Democrat-led states that challenged Trump's order also expressed confidence that it would never be enforced. 'We have every expectation we absolutely will be successful in keeping the 14th Amendment as the law of the land,' said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, 'and of course birthright citizenship as well.' Locally, a City Hall spokesperson confirmed to The Post that Friday's Supreme Court ruling has no effect on New York City at this time. With Post wires
