A Tennessee Republican says he will file articles of impeachment against a federal judge who blocked President Trump from ending Temporary Protected Status for Somalis, accusing her of defying the Supreme Court and the Constitution.
Rep. Andy Ogles announced the move on Friday, naming U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs as the target. Burroughs, appointed by President Obama, issued a ruling that prevented the administration from terminating TPS protections for Somali nationals. Ogles called the decision an act of judicial activism and said he would file the impeachment articles on Monday, Just the News reported.
The congressman did not hold back. In a statement provided to the outlet, Ogles laid out his reasoning in blunt terms.
"SCOTUS made it very clear that lower courts cannot suspend TPS. Yet, an Obama-appointed judge is defying the Court and the Constitution in an attempt to subvert the will of the President."
He followed that with a direct call for removal.
"This judicial activist's obstruction of the people's will must be stopped. Judge Burroughs must be impeached."
Ogles also posted on X, writing: "On Monday I will file Articles of Impeachment against Judge Allison Burroughs for her unconstitutional act of Judicial Activism!!! Enough is enough, Americans First NOT 3rd world migrants." The post matched the tone and substance of his formal statement.
The specifics of the planned impeachment articles, the exact legal grounds, how many counts, and whether any co-sponsors have signed on, remain unclear. Ogles has not released the text of the filing, and no other members of Congress were named as supporters in the announcement.
Judge Burroughs has not publicly responded to the impeachment threat. Her chambers were not quoted in the report, and no statement from the court appeared in the coverage.
Ogles' effort fits a broader pattern of Republican lawmakers pushing back against federal judges they view as overstepping constitutional boundaries. Georgia Republicans recently filed impeachment articles against a federal judge over alleged misconduct, part of a growing willingness on the right to use Congress's impeachment power as a check on the judiciary.
At the center of the clash is Temporary Protected Status, a federal program that shields foreign nationals from deportation when conditions in their home countries, such as armed conflict or natural disaster, make return dangerous. The president has broad authority to designate and terminate TPS, though the program has become a flashpoint in the immigration debate.
Ogles contends the Supreme Court has already settled the question of whether lower courts can block TPS terminations, though he did not cite a specific case name or ruling date. His characterization, that the high court "made it very clear" lower courts lack that authority, is his own framing, and the underlying decision was not quoted or described in detail.
That framing echoes a recent appellate ruling in which Biden-appointed judges were overruled after the First Circuit sided with the Trump administration on TPS terminations. The trajectory of those cases has given Republicans ammunition to argue that lower-court resistance to executive immigration authority is legally unsustainable.
Judge Burroughs' ruling on TPS for Somalis is not described in detail in the available reporting. The case name, docket number, and the court in which she sits were not specified. What is clear is that her order blocked the Trump administration from carrying out the termination, and that Ogles views the order as a direct violation of both Supreme Court precedent and the separation of powers.
Federal judges serve lifetime appointments under Article III of the Constitution. Impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate is the only mechanism for removing them. The bar is high: the House must pass articles of impeachment by a simple majority, but removal requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate.
That means Ogles' articles, even if they pass the House, would face long odds in the Senate. But the filing itself serves a purpose beyond removal. It puts a public marker on what Ogles and like-minded Republicans see as a pattern of judicial overreach, unelected judges substituting their policy preferences for the elected president's lawful authority on immigration.
The question of judicial accountability has gained traction on the right. In one notable case, an Obama-appointed federal judge in Georgia faced impeachment over conduct unrelated to rulings, yet the episode highlighted how rarely Congress exercises its constitutional check on the judiciary. In another instance, a former Wisconsin judge was convicted of obstruction after helping an illegal immigrant evade ICE, a case that underscored the consequences when judges act outside the law.
Ogles' move is narrower in scope. He is not alleging personal misconduct. He is arguing that Burroughs' ruling itself, blocking the president's TPS decision in the face of what he calls clear Supreme Court precedent, constitutes an impeachable act. Whether that argument gains traction beyond a press release and a social media post will depend on whether House leadership takes it up and whether other Republicans rally behind it.
None of those details were available as of Friday afternoon. The articles have not been filed. No committee action has been announced. And Judge Burroughs, for now, remains silent.
When judges decide they can override both the president and the Supreme Court on immigration, Congress has every right, and arguably a duty, to remind them who answers to the voters and who does not.