R.I. Bar Association decries call to impeach judge for ruling against Trump policies
PROVIDENCE — The Rhode Island Bar Association president is decrying the latest attempt to impeach a federal judge in Rhode Island because he ruled against the Trump administration.
On June 5, US District Court Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. struck down Trump administration immigration policies that had halted asylum, green cards, and work permits for immigrants from 39 African, Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries.
A Republican congressman from Florida, Greg Steube, responded by introducing a resolution to impeach McConnell “for high crimes and misdemeanors.”
In a statement issued Thursday, Rhode Island Bar Association President Patrick A. Guida called Steube’s proposal “a deeply troubling example of a growing tendency to treat judicial decisions as political acts rather than legal judgments.”
“The rule of law depends upon an independent judiciary that can decide cases based on the law and the record before it, without fear of political retaliation,” Guida said.
Reasonable people can disagree about court rulings, and appellate courts are set up to handle those disagreements, he said. “However, the use of impeachment should not be a response to a judge’s interpretation and application of the law in a case properly before the court,” he said.
McConnell has been a federal judge for nearly 15 years. But recently, he has found himself in the glare of the national spotlight, ruling on a series of high-profile legal challenges to Trump administration actions and facing an escalating series of attempts to intimidate him.
The richest man in the world, Elon Musk, called for his impeachment and amplified false claims about his daughter. Members of Congress put his face on a “Wanted” poster and he received six credible death threats.
But the most disturbing moment came when someone sent a pizza to his house in the name of a federal judge’s son — a young man who’d been killed when a disgruntled litigant fired shots into that judge’s home.
In March 2025, Republican Congressmen Andrew Clyde, of Georgia, and Andy Ogles, of Tennessee, filed impeachment resolutions against McConnell and Theodore D. Chuang, a federal judge in Maryland who ruled that Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency likely acted unconstitutionally when dismantling the US Agency for International Development.
In his statement, Guida said, “The accusation that Judge McConnell has committed ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is particularly unwarranted. The articles filed against Judge McConnell are not based on allegations of corruption, misconduct, ethical violations, or abuse of office. Instead, they are based on disagreement with the outcome of a case. That distinction matters.”
Every day, federal judges must decide difficult and often controversial legal questions, he said.
Read more Judge blocks Tennessee from reporting sick children to immigration authorities, for now
“In fulfilling that responsibility, judges do not serve as advocates for any administration or political party,” Guida wrote. “Their obligation is to apply the law to the facts before them. Sometimes that means ruling for the government. Sometimes it means ruling against it.”
To suggest ousting McConnell because he rejected government legal arguments in a particular case “defies the concept of judicial independence,” he said.
“If judges face impeachment whenever elected officials disagree with their reasoning, the judiciary can no longer serve as an independent check within our constitutional system,” Guida wrote.
In filing an impeachment resolution, Steube claimed McConnell “put the interests of noncitizens seeking immigration benefits above the national security of the United States.”
“By issuing an order vacating policies designed to keep citizens from high-risk countries from posing a threat to public safety, he interfered with the executive branch’s ability to keep Americans safe,” Steube said. “Judges have a duty to faithfully apply the law, without substituting their own political views for legitimate national security concerns.”
Guida raised concerns about such rhetoric.
“Public officials are entitled to criticize judicial decisions, and vigorous debate about court rulings is expected,” he said. “But accusations that a judge acted improperly simply because an official or litigant dislikes the result undermine public confidence in the courts and misrepresent the role judges play in our system of government.”
In 2025, President Trump called for the impeachment of a federal judge who ordered deportation flights carrying more than 200 migrants to El Salvador be turned around while en route.
That prompted a rare statement from US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts Jr.
“For more than two centuries,” Roberts said at the time, “it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
Guida said, “Regardless of one’s views on immigration policy or the merits of Judge McConnell’s decisions, the use of impeachment as a response to a judicial ruling should concern anyone who values the independence of our courts. Judges should be evaluated based on their integrity, impartiality, and fidelity to the law, not whether politicians approve of their rulings.”
Read more Trump blames Iran for a drone strike on a cargo ship in Strait of Hormuz
Post Comment