In An Escalation, House GOP Talks Of Defunding The Judiciary And Eliminating Courts

This is your TPM evening briefing.
WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 03: U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) (L) pats Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) on the back as they arrive for the first day of the 119th Congress in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol Building on Ja... WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 03: U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) (L) pats Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) on the back as they arrive for the first day of the 119th Congress in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol Building on January 03, 2025 in Washington, DC. Rep. Johnson is working to retain the Speakership in the face of opposition within his own party as the 119th Congress holds its first session to vote for a new Speaker of the House. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

We began hearing talk last week that House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan’s (R-OH) upcoming hearings on supposed “abuses” of judicial authority might serve as a placeholder for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) actually entertaining the idea of judicial impeachments (which he doesn’t have the votes for) before the House passes its big, beautiful budget bill next month.

It looked like it might be used as a potential consolation prize for those pushing for the impeachment of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who has been handling the Alien Enemies Act case, and other judges who have blocked some of Trump’s most lawless executive actions in recent weeks. On top of hearings, House Republican leadership was also expected to move forward with a bill introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) that would place limits on some judges’ authority to issue nationwide injunctions. The “No Rogue Rulings Act” was voted out of the House Judiciary Committee in early March. It has remained unclear whether House Republicans have the votes to actually pass Issa’s measure.

But on Tuesday, House Republicans escalated their rhetoric around how exactly they may act to help Trump in his efforts to defy constitutional checks and balances. Politico had reported on Monday that Jordan planned to talk to the House Appropriations Committee about funding for the judicial branch. Jordan made remarks to reporters today that appear to confirm his interest in defunding the courts (at least, the ones that rule in ways Trump doesn’t like). The Appropriations Committee will soon begin its work crafting the bipartisan funding bills that Congress will need to pass to fund the government once the CR they just passed runs out in September. Per NBC News:

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who plans to hold a hearing focused on Boasberg and district judges next week, said he’s speaking with GOP appropriators about what he called “legislative remedies.”

“We got money, spending, the appropriations process to help try to address some of this,” Jordan said, without adding further details.

Johnson took things several steps further during his weekly press conference on Tuesday, when he floated the possibility that Congress might “eliminate” certain federal courts. My colleagues Emine Yücel spoke to House Democrats about Johnson’s remarks this afternoon. You can read that piece here, but per Emine:

The bafflement from the House Judiciary Democrats comes after Johnson spoke candidly to reporters about House Republicans’ options for acting on Trump’s judiciary grievances Tuesday. Several members of the House Republican conference have floated various actions they want to take to rein in federal judges who have angered Trump by blocking some of his administration’s most lawless executive actions in recent weeks.

“We do have the authority over the federal courts, as you know. We can eliminate an entire district court. We have power of funding over the courts and all these other things,” Johnson told reporters during a press conference. “But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act.”

‘Mistakes Were Made’

There were plenty of truly stunning moments today as members of the Senate Intelligence Committee grilled DNI Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe about how on earth an Atlantic editor was added to a war-planning group chat the nation’s top intelligence officials — and why they were using a commercially available app to discuss classified information in the first place. Aaron Rupar documents some of the most befuddling dodges from the two here.

The baffled reactions are not just coming from Democrats. Republicans have piped up — a bit — too, voicing “concern.” Senate Armed Service Chair Roger Wicker (R-MS) confirmed to reporters Tuesday that his committee would be investigating what exactly happened with what is starting to be referred to as SignalGate.

“We’re going to look into this and see what the facts are, but it’s definitely a concern. And you can be sure the committee, House and Senate, will be looking into this,” Wicker said Tuesday, adding the understatement of the year:

“And it appears that mistakes were made, no question.”

Bondi Now Wants Crockett To Apologize To Elon

Attorney General Pam Bondi’s on Sunday warned Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) about her participation in a non-violent “TeslaTakedown” conference call. Now, Bondi is also demanding an apology from Crockett. The ongoing saga is another bizarre example of Trump’s Justice Department using its authority to go after the President’s — and, now, Elon Musk’s — perceived political enemies. 

Crockett specifically noted during the “TeslaTakedown” conference call last week that she was not advocating for violence of any kind. But in response, Bondi still advised Crockett to “tread very carefully.”

During a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity Monday night, Bondi said that Crockett should apologize to Tesla shareholders and to the country: “She must apologize immediately not only to all Texans, but to our country, to the American shareholders of Tesla, because she is promoting violence.”

— Khaya Himmelman

ICYMI

NEW from Josh Kovensky: How The Alien Enemies Act Deportations Were Orchestrated To Keep the Courts Unaware

Two Dozen Bar Associations Condemn Trump’s Latest Attack On Rule Of Law

Trump DOJ Refuses To Give Judge Info On Alien Enemies Act Flights

House Dems Tear Into Johnson’s ‘Outrageous’ Suggestion That Congress Could ‘Eliminate’ Some Fed Courts

Yesterday’s Most Read Story

IRS Predicts DOGE Lost Half a Trillion Dollars for the USA

What We Are Reading

Meeting with House panel, OPM officials cut short after clash between top lawmakers 

Trump targets Jenner & Block in latest executive order aimed at law firms 

NSA warned of vulnerabilities in Signal app a month before Houthi strike chat

Latest Where Things Stand
13
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. GOP, then: “We are the party of Law and Order!”

    GOP, now: “Law, huh! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing.”

  2. Bondi Now Wants Crockett To Apologize To Elon

    We already know what Jasmine Crockett has to say to FElon.

  3. I hope Representative Crockett would have a similar response to Bondi. When did it become the job of the Attorney General of the United States to police language?

    1. Thank goodness Chuck Schumer caved so that they could keep the Judiciary funded and running. (/sarc)
    2. I wouldn’t be so sure that the Senate Dems wouldn’t agree to impeach Boasberg, if they got a verbal pinky-promise from the GOP to not gut the judiciary (which they would obviously go back on almost immediately).
  4. First, Bondi’s always been a liar, and, to paraphrase a late famous Republican, “There she goes again!” Crockett explicitly said she did not advocate and does not want violence, but that’s not what the MAGA base wants to hear. Ergo…

    Second, yes, the Congress does have the control over the Federal judiciary that its toads are threatening to execute. But, to paraphrase a recently noted lying Attorney General, “They should tread very carefully” lest they make of themselves indiceted co-conspirators. Not that they aren’t really already there.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

7 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for sysprog Avatar for epicurus Avatar for southerndem Avatar for jmacaz Avatar for brian512 Avatar for sckefauver Avatar for old_guru Avatar for Scoutmom Avatar for ClutchCargo Avatar for doncoolidge Avatar for plymster

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher & Digital Producer:
Senior Developer:
Senior Designer: