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
CNBC
24 minutes ago
- CNBC
Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' clears key Senate hurdle after high drama
The Senate on Saturday cleared a key procedural hurdle to advance President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill," bringing the massive spending legislation one step closer to passage after weeks of painstaking negotiations. The Senate vote delivered a boost for Republican Majority Leader John Thune's bid to get the bill to Trump's desk by July 4. But it was not without drama. The vote on the motion to proceed was open for hours on Saturday night, and only passed after three Republican holdouts gave in and voted yes. The hours of uncertainty underscored the tricky path forward for the massive package. The procedural vote tees up a final vote on the megabill in the Senate likely sometime Sunday or Monday. Democrats, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, are forcing the 940-page bill to be read out loud once it heads to full debate on the Senate floor Sunday. "We will be here all night if that's what it takes to read it," Schumer wrote Saturday on X. While the package cannot officially pass the upper chamber until the final vote, the procedural vote was considered a big test for Thune. The vote comes after weeks of turmoil and tension over the massive package that exposed bitter policy disputes and emboldened some firm Republican holdouts. The sweeping domestic policy package will also have to be passed again in the House, which just narrowly passed its own version of the bill last month. Some House Republicans have already expressed opposition to key elements of the Senate version of the bill — most notably deep cuts to Medicaid — likely foreshadowing a close vote in the lower chamber. Both Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson hold narrow majorities in their respective chambers, meaning they can only afford to lose the support of a small number of Republican lawmakers to pass the package in a party-line vote. Meanwhile, Trump continues to urge lawmakers to get the package passed before Republicans' self-imposed July 4 deadline. "President Trump is committed to keeping his promises, and failure to pass this bill would be the ultimate betrayal," the White House said in a statement of administration policy on Saturday. This is breaking news. Check back for updates.
Fox News
27 minutes ago
- Fox News
Senate Republicans ram Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' through key test vote
Senate Republicans rammed President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" through a procedural hurdle after hours of tense negotiations that put the megabill's fate into question. Speculation swirled whether Republicans would be satisfied by the latest edition of the mammoth bill, which was released just before the stroke of midnight Saturday morning. Nearly every Republican, except Sens. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., all voted to unlock a marathon 20-hour debate on the bill. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., could only afford to lose three votes. Though successful, the 51-49 party line vote was not without drama. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., flipped his vote from a 'no' to 'yes' in dramatic fashion, as he and Sens. Rick Scott, R-Fla., Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., and Mike Lee, R-Utah, made their way to the Senate floor accompanied by Vice President JD Vance. Vance was called in case he was needed for a tie-breaking vote, but only his negotiating services ended up being used. No lawmaker wanted to be the fourth and final decisive vote to kill the bill. Republican leadership kept the floor open for nearly four hours while negotiations, first on the Senate floor and then eventually in Thune's office, continued. The bill won't immediately be debated thanks to Senate Democrats' plan to force the reading of the entire, 940-page legislative behemoth on the Senate floor – a move that could drain several hours and go deep into the night. The megabill's fate, and whether it could pass its first test, was murky at best after senators met behind closed doors Friday, and even during another luncheon on Saturday. Lingering concerns in both chambers about Medicaid — specifically the Medicaid provider tax rate and the effect of direct payments to states — energy tax credits, the state and local tax (SALT) deduction and others proved to be pain points that threatened the bill's survival. However, changes were made at the last-minute to either sate holdouts or comply with the Senate rules. Indeed, the Senate parliamentarian stripped numerous items from the bill that had to be reworked. The Medicaid provider tax rate was kept largely the same, except its implementation date was moved back a year. Also included as a sweetener for lawmakers like Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and others was a $25 billion rural hospital stabilization fund over the next five years. Collins said that she would support the bill through the procedural hurdle, and noted that the rural hospital stabilization fund was a start, but whether she supports the bill on final passage remains to be seen. "If the bill is not further changed, I will be leaning against the bill, but I do believe this procedural vote to get on the bill so that people can offer amendments and debate it is appropriate," Collins said. Tillis, who is also concerned about the changes to Medicaid and would like to see a return to the House GOP's version, said that he would not vote in favor of the bill during final passage. The SALT deduction included in the House GOP's version of the bill also survived, albeit the $40,000 cap will remain intact for five years. After that, the cap will revert to its current $10,000. Other sweeteners, like expanding nutrition benefit waivers to Alaska and a tax cut for whaling boat captains, were thrown in, too, to get moderates like Murkowski onboard with the bill. Lee announced that he withdrew his open lands sale provision, which proved a sticking point for lawmakers in Montana and Idaho. Still, Republicans who are not satisfied with the current state of the bill will use the forthcoming "vote-a-rama," when lawmakers can offer an unlimited number of amendments, to try and change as much as they can before final passage. Democrats, however, will use the process to inflict as much pain as possible on Republicans. Once the amendment marathon concludes, which could be in the wee hours of Sunday morning, lawmakers will move to a final vote to send the bill, which is an amendment to the House GOP's version of the "big, beautiful bill," back to the lower chamber. From there, it's a dead sprint to get the package on the president's desk by July 4. In a statement of administration policy obtained by Fox News Digital, Trump signaled that he would sign the bill. "President Trump is committed to keeping his promises," the memo read. "And failure to pass this bill would be the ultimate betrayal."
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Multiple full-time jobs': Inside the life of young parents in Congress
WASHINGTON — Just one week after Texas Rep. Brandon Gill's wife had given birth to their second child, the first-term Republican boarded a plane to Washington, D.C., to vote on a crucial markup for President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' It wasn't Gill's plan to return to the Capitol so soon. In fact, the 31-year-old father had left town on paternity leave and wasn't expected to return for a few weeks. But as opposition grew among Republican lawmakers, the framework was threatened with failure in the House Budget Committee markup — requiring all hands on deck to return and salvage the measure. 'We got to the point where … it's time for this bill to get voted out of committee, and they needed my vote,' Gill told the Deseret News in an interview. But even with Gill's return, the bill still failed to make it out of the committee, resulting in several negotiations over the weekend between GOP leadership and fiscal conservatives to get Trump's tax bill passed. The committee ultimately advanced the package during a rare Sunday night meeting that Gill once again had to leave his wife and children to attend. 'I flew back immediately after (the Friday meeting), and then came in for a Sunday night meeting, and did the same thing,' Gill recalled. 'And we were able to get it done.' The back-and-forth underscores the difficulty for parents in Congress who must balance the demands of raising a family with the chaotic nature of being a lawmaker in Washington, D.C. Take Utah Rep. Blake Moore, for example. Because of his duties on Capitol Hill, the father of four was forced to miss the birth of his youngest son as well as his first two birthdays. But even on average weeks, Moore's absence is felt by both him and his family. For instance, chauffeuring kids from school to sports practices and back home again can be challenging for his wife, who must juggle the competing schedules on her own. 'It's a huge sacrifice,' Moore said. 'It's really tough.' Moore says he likens the experience to a military deployment of sorts — reflecting on the sacrifice made by those in the armed services. 'To some degree, that makes it a little bit easier to go through this. But it's still hard,' Moore said. 'I've chosen this. My wife and I have decided we're in this together.' Moore, who was first elected in 2020, notes the difficulties of navigating a public profile don't end when your children become slightly more independent. As their kids become older and more politically aware, it opens the door for them to witness attacks against their parents — whether it's negative news coverage or protests outside campaign events. 'They can see what some of the commentary is. I don't read the comments anymore, but the commentary is mostly negative,' Moore said. 'That's something that I knew was a part of it, but my kids were so young when I first ran for Congress. Now they are a little bit more aware, and it's like, oh, they're gonna see people say some really, really rude (and) hateful things about me.' But despite the challenges, the job does allow lawmakers to carve out some time to spend with their families. Moore, for instance, spends Saturdays at home coaching his sons' little league teams. Gill similarly dedicates time to his family when he is home, telling the Deseret News: 'My top priority is my wife and kids.' 'Whenever I'm home, I try to be fully engaged with my family,' said Gill, who has two young children. 'So whenever I'm in D.C., we absolutely pack the schedule to be as productive as possible, to free up time whenever I'm at home. I would say that it's kind of like multiple full-time jobs.' And that effort doesn't stop when lawmakers board their planes to come to the office. As members spend time on the campaign trail or fulfill their duties in Washington, their family members are often right by their sides. 'It is definitely a lot to juggle, but we try to keep the family involved as much as possible,' Gill said. 'So whenever Danielle and the kids can come up here, they do. They travel with me. So it adds a little bit more chaos, but it's a good chaos.' Several members often bring their children to Capitol Hill, even occasionally bringing them along to vote on legislation. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., who gave birth to her only child in August 2023, is often seen wheeling a stroller into the House chamber during votes throughout the week. Rep. Brittany Pettersen, D-Colo., regularly carries her 6-month-old son to votes and press conferences. Just one month after giving birth, Pettersen suprised her colleagues by returning to Washington to oppose a key vote on Republicans' budget plans. The proposal ultimately passed, albeit by the slimmest of margins, but Pettersen said the effort was worth it. 'We went back and forth on if I could leave Sam, what that would look like, but we didn't know how long I'd be stuck there. And you can't just leave your newborn baby for days,' Pettersen recalled. 'It was terrifying, it was overwhelming, but I knew that too many lives are on the line in my district, and I was not going to not be there.' Pettersen made headlines as she held Sam in her arms while she cast her vote against the proposal. As a result, her son has become somewhat of a micro-celebrity. 'He's been in so many pictures of people visiting my office, and you know, they'll shake my hand and say, 'Oh, hi, nice to meet you.' And then they'll see Sam, and it's 'I can't believe Sam's here,'' Pettersen said in an interview. 'So everyone's very excited when they get to see Sam in the office.' Since being born in January, Sam has traveled with Pettersen every time she has returned to Washington — a total of 18 flights so far, Pettersen told the Deseret News. 'I remind myself that while some of the pieces of my job are unique, it's being in Congress, obviously, but I'm doing what moms and parents across America do,' Pettersen said. 'You have to somehow make it work, and every day you have to figure out what that looks like.' Moore says his sons enjoy coming with him to vote on the House floor, especially when they get to mess around with their dad's colleagues. 'There's a video of my son, sort of kicking (New York Rep.) Andrew Garbarino in the shins. And he may have been directed to do that by me or not,' Moore said with a chuckle. 'They love (Iowa Rep.) Randy Feenstra because they've gone skiing with him before.' 'I think the biggest positive is being able to have my kids experience things that you wouldn't otherwise get to experience,' he added. Although the presence of children in the chamber has become more commonplace in recent years, it hasn't always been that way. Up until a few decades ago, Congress mostly consisted of older men who didn't have young children at home. That demographic has begun to shift in recent years, especially after Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., became the first female senator to give birth while in office in 2018. Since then, there's been somewhat of a baby boom on Capitol Hill — followed by increased efforts to make the country's deliberative body more accessible to young families. Those efforts reached a head earlier this year when Luna and Pettersen forged a rare bipartisan coalition, pressing GOP leaders to allow new mothers to vote remotely while taking maternity leave at home. The pair managed to freeze action on the floor and force a deal with leadership, who ultimately agreed to a watered-down rule change to cancel out absent votes. 'Thanks to POTUS and his support of new moms being able to vote when recovering from child (birth) as well as those who worked hard to get these changes done,' Luna said in a statement when the rule was finalized in April. 'If we truly want a pro-family Congress, these are the changes that need to happen.' But the system still contains flaws that make that system difficult in practice, Pettersen said. For example, shortly after the 'vote pairing' resolution was adopted, Pettersen told the Deseret News she reached out to her Republican colleagues to cancel out her vote so she could return home for her maternity leave. 'Of course, nobody would, because it was a Republican priority bill,' Pettersen said. 'It's just unworkable. And so there is so much more that we need to do.' While that may start with increased accommodations for young parents, Pettersen said, it should extend to making daily schedules more adaptable for lawmakers with children. 'We have schedules that are not made for for regular people, for young parents with young kids,' Pettersen said. 'It's a system that's created for retired, older, wealthier individuals, and so we need to modernize the way that our schedule looks.' Most lawmakers agree that Congress should be more convenient for those with children at home, arguing it would be beneficial for younger adults to influence policy. While it is difficult, 'it's doable,' they say. 'It's far more doable if you're a representative from Virginia or North Carolina or Pennsylvania than if you are from Utah or North Dakota,' Moore said. 'I think it's just an overall good trend that you're seeing more of it, and people are realizing it's possible. But the challenges are still very — they're insurmountable in some cases.' 'I do think it's a really good thing for us to be more accessible to parents, partly because that helps allow people who are a little bit younger to be here, which is a good thing,' Gill added. 'It adds a little bit of representation that maybe wasn't here before.'
