First on Fox: Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., It is expected that on Tuesday he will meet the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee, two people who are familiar with the plans told Fox News Digital.
The timing or reason for the meeting is not immediately clear, but it comes to map out as Republicans in the congress how they can respond to what they see as “activist” judges who block the president Donald Trump’s agenda.
The committee is currently planned to mark various documents legislation, not related to the judicial impasse, on Tuesday morning at 10 am et. Johnson is planned to keep his weekly press conference at that time.
It comes as the Trump government has confronted More than a dozen recommend From different judges of the court throughout the country about different policy decisions.
Who is James Boasberg, the American judge in the center of Trump’s deportation efforts?
Chairman of the house Mike Johnson, R-La., Tumbles with reporters in the Capitol in Washington, January 7, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, file)
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., On Monday announced that the legislators would vote for a bill next week under the leadership of Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., To limit the assets of the judges of the American court to promote national orders.
Fox News Digital was told last week that Trump himself showed an interest in the account.
In the meantime, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Jim Jordan, R-Hiio, is expected To keep a hearing About the issue of activist judges early next week.
Various conservative legislators have also introduced or threatened resolutions to accuse specific judges who block the Trump agenda.
It is known from Johnson that it meets various factions of the house when they try to push important pieces of legislation, especially when there are different opinions about what to do, to ensure that all legislators who want to express a position are heard.
But Gop -Leiders from Huis have also been on their care to find out one of the calls for accusation, afraid that it would not be the most effective approach.
‘Unless insufficient’: American judge Reams Trump admin for days-late deportation info
US President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, 7 March 2025. (Reuters/Evelyn Hockstein/File photo/File photo)
However, Trump has previously given an interest in the accusing of judge James Boasberg of the American court after he had issued an emergency order that blocks the Aragua calling members under the Alien Enemies Act through the administration of suspected Tren.
Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced a resolution last week to accuse Boasberg for “abuse of power”. The legislation received three new supporters on Monday and now has 19 total co-sponsors.
Some house republicans, however, have expressed hesitation about the idea when Fox News Digital was asked on Monday evening.
“We should not reduce De Standaard for accusation, but we must – we mean that it means congress – must offer a cure for judges of the court who completely bridge,” said Rep. Nick Lalota, rn.y ..
Another Republican of the house that refused to be called, said they were “completely against” against accusation.
“The professional process is for that,” they said.
First -year Gop Rep. Brandon Gill introduced a bill to accuse the American district court judge James Boasberg (Getty Images)
Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ond., Stated that the resolutions for deposition sent a necessary message.
Click here to get the Fox News app
“The reason I sponsored Gill’s efforts is just – if we don’t say anything, the jury members will be like:” Oh, we can do what we want. ” So they need to know that we look and that there is a group of ours that, if that is what is needed, we would support that, “said Stutzman.
Rep. Ralph Norman, RS.C., said that ISSA’s bill was a “start”, but said that the Caucus of the Freedom Caucus house would have discussions about whether the group wanted to insist on accusation.
Fox News Digital reached Johnson’s Office and the House Judiciary Committee for comment, but did not immediately hear again.
