House Republicans call for investigation into Obama-appointed judge in Trump funding case

FIRST ON FOX: A pair of Republican oversight hawks escalated a complaint on Tuesday about a district court judge who is presiding over one of the Trump administration’s cases, alleging the judge has a financial conflict of interest.

Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman and member of the House Judiciary Committee, respectively, asked the judicial council for the First Circuit Court of Appeals to investigate Judge John McConnell, according to a letter obtained by Fox News Digital.

McConnell, an Obama appointee, has been presiding over a pivotal funding freeze case in Rhode Island brought by 22 states with Democratic attorneys general. The case centers on the Office of Management and Budget’s order in January that federal agencies implement a multibillion-dollar suspension of federal benefits.

JUDGE TARGETED BY GOP FOR IMPEACHMENT DEALS BLOW TO TRUMP'S FEMA OBJECTIVES

The states’ lawsuit argued the funding freeze was illegal because Congress had already approved the funds for use. McConnell agreed with the states and blocked the administration from suspending the funds, and the case is now sitting before the First Circuit Court of Appeals.

McConnell wrote in an order in March that the Trump administration’s funding suspension "fundamentally undermines the distinct constitutional roles of each branch of our government." 

The judge said the freeze lacked "rationality" and showed no "thoughtful consideration of practical consequences" because it threatened states’ "ability to provide vital services, including but not limited to public safety, health care, education, childcare, and transportation infrastructure."

Issa and Jordan said McConnell’s long-standing leadership roles with Crossroads Rhode Island, a nonprofit that has received millions of dollars in federal and state grants, raised the possibility of a judicial ethics violation.

"Given Crossroads’s reliance on federal funds, Judge McConnell’s rulings had the effect of restoring funding to Crossroads, directly benefitting the organization and creating a conflict of interest," Jordan and Issa wrote.

Their letter was directed to Judge David Barron, chief judge of the First Circuit and chair of the First Circuit Judicial Council.

FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMIN FROM DISMANTLING 3 AGENCIES

McConnell was quick to become one of Trump’s judicial nemeses when he became involved with the funding freeze case. His initial order blocking the freeze and subsequent orders to enforce his injunction and unfreeze FEMA funds fueled criticism from Trump's allies.

The Trump-aligned group America First Legal has been highlighting McConnell’s ties to Crossroads Rhode Island for months through its own investigation and complaint to the First Circuit.

Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., filed articles of impeachment against the judge in March, though impeachment as a solution for judges with whom Republicans take issue has not garnered widespread support among the broader Republican conference.

Vocal Trump supporter Laura Loomer targeted the judge’s daughter on social media, and X CEO Elon Musk elevated her grievance on his platform.

One of McConnell’s local newspapers, the Providence Journal, described the judge as a man "well-known" in Democratic political circles and a major donor to Democratic politicians and organizations before he was confirmed to the bench in 2011.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

McConnell included Crossroads Rhode Island and his membership as a board member in his recent public annual financial disclosure reports. No parties in the case have actively sought his recusal at this stage.

An aide for the judge did not respond to a request for comment.

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. 

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.

Mark Green announces retirement from Congress before end of term

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green, R-Tenn., is departing Capitol Hill early, he announced on Monday.

Green said he is leaving Congress for the private sector after the House votes again on President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" in the coming weeks, in a statement first obtained by Fox News Digital.

"It is with a heavy heart that I announce my retirement from Congress. Recently, I was offered an opportunity in the private sector that was too exciting to pass up. As a result, today I notified the Speaker and the House of Representatives that I will resign from Congress as soon as the House votes once again on the reconciliation package," Green said.

HOUSE GOP TARGETS ANOTHER DEM OFFICIAL ACCUSED OF BLOCKING ICE AMID DELANEY HALL FALLOUT

He called serving Tennessee's 7th Congressional District "the honor of a lifetime."

"They asked me to deliver on the conservative values and principles we all hold dear, and I did my level best to do so. Along the way, we passed historic tax cuts, worked with President Trump to secure the border, and defended innocent life. I am extremely proud of my work as Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, and want to thank my staff, both in my seventh district office, as well as the professional staff on that committee," Green said.

Green acknowledged in his statement that he had previously geared up to retire in the last Congress, but reversed course.

MEET THE TRUMP-PICKED LAWMAKERS GIVING SPEAKER JOHNSON A FULL HOUSE GOP CONFERENCE

"Though I planned to retire at the end of the previous Congress, I stayed to ensure that President Trump’s border security measures and priorities make it through Congress," he said.

"By overseeing the border security portion of the reconciliation package, I have done that. After that, I will retire, and there will be a special election to replace me."

Green is an Army veteran who has served in Congress since 2019.

As House Homeland Security Committee chairman, he oversaw Republicans' impeachment of former Biden administration DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

It's not clear where in the private sector Green will go, but it's a safe bet to assume his House seat will stay in Republican hands.

The district voted for President Donald Trump by more than 20 percentage points over former Vice President Kamala Harris last year.

Republican leaders are hoping to complete consideration of Trump's massive agenda bill by the Fourth of July or shortly thereafter.

The bill passed the House in a narrow 215-214 vote, and it is now being considered by the Senate. If the Senate changes the bill, as expected, the House will have to approve that version before it hits Trump's desk.

WATCH: Republicans rally behind Trump, continue to support Musk amid ‘big, beautiful’ brawl

A "big, beautiful" brawl erupted on social media Thursday as President Donald Trump and Elon Musk aired their grievances for all to see after months of working together to cut government waste. 

House Republicans rallied behind the president and continued to support Musk when discussing the fallout with Fox News Digital.

"Obviously, I have President Trump's back. I don't think that he should be impeached. Do I think that he was on the Jeffrey Epstein island? I don't think so," Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., said, referring to Musk calling for Trump's impeachment and suggestiong Trump was "in the Epstein files."

Despite her defense, Luna admitted Musk is not a "terrible person," and both men have made "great contributions" to the Republican Party

FETTERMAN DISSES DEMS FOR SUDDENLY EMBRACING MUSK AMID TRUMP FALLOUT

"I assure you he crossed the line on what he said about the sitting president of the United States today," Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said of Musk's allegations about Trump. 

'GONE TOO FAR': GOP LAWMAKERS RALLY AROUND TRUMP AFTER MUSK RAISES EPSTEIN ALLEGATIONS

But Roy joined Luna in defending Musk's contribution to cutting government waste through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 

"The bottom line is, we have a job to do. Elon is doing a great job in terms of the rescissions in terms of the DOGE cuts they identified, and I don't disagree with him about our need to go find more spending cuts. I don't. But you know, guys, keep it in the lines," Roy added. 

Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., praised Trump Thursday for saving the country. 

"What's broken apart can be put back together, but you've got two strong personalities," Norman said of Trump and Musk. 

Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn, dismissed the men's social media brawl, telling Fox News Digital, "They're the two biggest dogs in the pound. They're going to fight."

"It's going to settle down at some point," Rep. Burgess Owens, R-Utah, added. 

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt attributed Musk's tirade to Trump's bill, which is focused on working- and middle-class tax relief and not benefiting Musk and his companies enough.

"This is an unfortunate episode from Elon, who is unhappy with the One Big Beautiful Bill because it does not include the policies he wanted. The president is focused on passing this historic piece of legislation and making our country great again," Leavitt said.

In the first of several posts targeting the bill, and then Trump directly, Musk said, "I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it."

Fox News Digital's Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report. 

‘Watermelon head’: Trump trolls Democratic Sen Schiff

Sen. Adam Schiff fired back late Tuesday after President Donald Trump mocked the California Democrat during a black-tie Republican dinner in Washington, D.C.

"The President of the United States seems oddly focused on me," Schiff posted after footage of Trump's jokes made the rounds.

"Shouldn't he be focused on the economy he's crashing?" he wrote.

During the event hosted by the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) – the House Republicans' campaign arm – Trump wove in a few insults about the Boston-born Angeleno's appearance into a verbal indictment of his role in the 2016 Russia collusion investigation.

KASH PATEL ENRAGES ADAM SCHIFF IN CLINTONIAN BATTLE OVER THE WORD ‘WE’

"Adam ‘Schifty’ Schiff – can you believe this guy?" Trump said. "He's got the smallest neck I've ever seen – and the biggest head: We call him Watermelon-Head." Trump went on to ruminate about how Schiff's "big fat face" could "stand on a neck" the size of the president's finger. 

"It's the weirdest thing – it's a mystery; no one can understand it."

Trump went on to call Schiff "one of the most dishonest human beings I've ever seen," and wondered aloud how people like Schiff could be able to run for office.

FLASHBACK: SCHIFF, WHO REPEATEDLY CLAIMED EVIDENCE OF RUSSIAN COLLUSION, DENOUNCES DURHAM REPORT AS ‘FLAWED’

"He was in charge of the fake witch hunt – with 'Russia, Russia, Russia' – it was a made-up story," he said, playing off the "Brady Bunch" line "Marsha, Marsha, Marsha."

In 2020, Schiff managed the House's impeachment probe into Trump, leading off his opening remarks that January by comparing former Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton's 1792 warning to then-President George Washington about future American leaders who would rise to the executive "despotic in [their] ordinary demeanor."

"When a man unprincipled in private life desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents, having the advantage of military habits… known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion—to flatter and fall in with all the nonsense of the zealots of the day—It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may ‘ride the storm and direct the whirlwind," Schiff said at the time.

Since then, he and Trump have often traded criticisms, with Trump also referring to him in the past as a "structural marvel," with an appearance like a "finger on a basketball."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

In October, Trump compared Schiff to the "enemy from within" and called him a "sleazebag" on FOX Business before lamenting that the Democrat would likely defeat former MLB star Steve Garvey for California's open U.S. Senate seat.

For his part, Schiff has also clapped back at Republicans for their criticisms – responding in July to a report that now-Vice President JD Vance had lamented campaign name-calling after Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz called the GOP ticket "weird."

"Shifty Schiff, pencil neck and watermelon head, would like a word, JD," Schiff responded at the time on Facebook.

Fox News Digital reached out to Schiff for additional comment but did not immediately hear back.

Republicans, Democrats trade barbs in heated hearing on activist judges blocking Trump agenda

Democrats and Republicans repeatedly clashed on Tuesday during a lengthy hearing on what the GOP calls "activist judges" blocking President Donald Trump's agenda.

The House Judiciary Committee's subcommittees on the Constitution and on courts held the joint hearing in preparation for a House-wide vote on legislation that would limit district judges' ability to issue nationwide injunctions. That bill is currently stalled, however, after an unrelated fight on proxy voting paralyzed the House floor.

During the hearing, Democrats repeatedly tried to press Republicans on the issue of judicial impeachments — something pushed by conservatives but that House GOP leaders have shown little appetite for pursuing.

WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP'S DEPORTATION EFFORTS?

"Some guy I've never heard of, he, might be in Congress, introduced an impeachment resolution, and he's not here," Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., said of an impeachment resolution targeting U.S. district Judge James Boasberg by Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas.

"He hasn't been here for at least the last hour, and every witness here is in agreement that we really shouldn't be impeaching judges. I haven't heard a single colleague on the other side say we should be impeaching judges."

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who was co-chairing the hearing alongside Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, asked Swalwell to yield his time — but the California Democrat refused.

"I don't think they have anything to talk about with the bills, since they offered a similar bill, and even the solicitor general, as late as October of last year in the Biden administration, wanted exactly what we're moving out of committee today," Issa told Fox News Digital about Democrats' ploy.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., compared conservatives' push to impeach judges to House Republicans' impeachment inquiry efforts into former President Joe Biden — which ultimately did not end in any such proceedings.

"I guess we're taking a page out of [House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer's] playbook, we're just doing fake impeachments," Moskowitz told Fox News Digital.

But Roy, who co-led the hearing with Issa, told Fox News Digital it was about "trying to make clear that you've got a handful of judges acting, clearly politically, to stop the administration from acting."

"It's pretty clear that my Democratic colleagues prefer to defend the right of an MS-13 gang member, clearly here illegally, from being deported," Roy said.

'WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT': US JUDGE REAMS TRUMP ADMIN FOR DAYS-LATE DEPORTATION INFO

But Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis., another member of the committee, said at least one goal was to "raise the profile of the issue."

"Maybe the more headlines a hearing like this gets, it clearly sets it on the plate of Chief Justice Roberts, right, to take action and try to get control of the courts again," he said.

It's not immediately clear when Issa's bill will get a vote, after House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., announced House floor activity was canceled for the rest of this week.

EXCLUSIVE: Emerging GOP leader backing Trump’s use of Alien Enemies Act at Supreme Court

EXCLUSIVE – Freshman Congressman Brandon Gill, R-Texas, is teaming with pro-MAGA law firm America First Legal to file an amicus brief to the Supreme Court backing President Donald Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport illegal immigrant gang members. 

Gill, an outspoken conservative, was behind the effort to impeach the activist judge who halted the Trump administration's deportation of members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua – a violent criminal group known by its acronym TdA.

The brief was filed to the Supreme Court on Tuesday, just days after acting U.S. Solicitor General Sarah Harris petitioned the court to lift a temporary restraining order inhibiting the administration from carrying out its deportation agenda.

In their brief, America First and Gill argue the president has "absolute authority" under the Alien Enemies Act to determine when an invasion has occurred, and that this decision is "not judicially reviewable."

RED STATE MOVES TO DEFUND COUNTY AFTER LEADER VOWS TO ‘INTERFERE AND INTERRUPT’ ICE DEPORTATIONS

The brief argues that "the evidence is that TdA has invaded the United States at the direction of the Venezuelan government and continues to invade, attempt to invade, and threaten to invade the country; perpetrated irregular warfare within the country; and used drug trafficking as a weapon against American citizens." 

In a statement to Fox News Digital, America First senior counsel James Rogers said, "The notion that a single unelected judge may take it upon himself to micromanage the defense of our nation is an unprecedented and complete corruption of the separation of powers, which is a bedrock feature of our Republic."

"AFL is proud to join with Rep. Brandon Gill to stand up for the rule of law and to protect our American citizens," said Rogers. 

"The evidence is that TdA is tied to the Government of Venezuela; members of this violent gang clearly qualify as invading aliens under the Alien Enemies Act," he added. "This law was passed more than 226 years ago, and courts have always held that they lack the power to interfere with the President’s authority as Commander in Chief to decide when to invoke the Act and expel aliens under its terms."

DISTURBING CONTENT WARNING: ILLEGAL ACCUSED OF KILLING GEORGIA GRANDMOTHER FACES NEW DISTURBING CHARGES

"No plaintiff is entitled to use the courts to frustrate the president's exercise of clear constitutional authority," added America First Vice President Dan Epstein.

"The Biden administration’s failures depict clear reasons why the United States must fight this visceral threat to American self-government and the rule of law," he went on, adding, "The president declared that the United States is under invasion. The president has the power to make such a determination."

This comes after a 2-1 decision by a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel upheld a ruling by D.C. federal Judge James Boasberg, a Biden appointee, further blocking the Trump administration's immigration enforcement plans. 

At issue is the Trump administration's authority to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 wartime law, to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals, including alleged members of Tren de Aragua, which was designated a foreign terrorist organization by the Trump State Department.

BLUE STATE SANCTUARY LAWS ENABLED ILLEGAL 'ABOLISH ICE' ACTIVIST TO EVADE CAPTURE, SAYS LOCAL DA

Trump issued an executive order on March 15 titled "Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Regarding the Invasion of the United States by Tren De Aragua." In the order, Trump stated that TdA is sponsored by Venezuelan socialist dictator Nicolás Maduro with the goal of "destabilizing democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States."

In response, Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order immediately blocking the Trump administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan nationals. In his ruling, Boasberg cited the need to better consider the merits of the case, prompting the administration to file an emergency request for the U.S. appeals court to intervene. 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE IMMIGRATION COVERAGE

The Trump administration’s appeal described the restraining order as a "massive, unauthorized imposition on the Executive’s authority to remove dangerous aliens who pose threats to the American people." 

SAN DIEGO BORDER PATROL CHIEF SAYS CALLING LOW CROSSING NUMBERS A 'DRAMATIC CHANGE' IS AN 'UNDERSTATEMENT'

In the administration’s petition to the Supreme Court, Harris said this case "presents fundamental questions about who decides how to conduct sensitive national-security-related operations in this country – the president, through Article II, or the judiciary, through TROs [temporary restraining orders]."

She said the Constitution "supplies a clear answer: the president," adding, "The republic cannot afford a different choice."

SCOOP: Judge Boasberg impeachment push gains support despite House GOP leaders’ resistance

FIRST ON FOX: A resolution to impeach U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg is still gaining support despite House GOP leaders' hesitation to move on such a measure.

Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced an article of impeachment against Boasberg last month after he issued an emergency order temporarily halting the Trump administration's deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act.

Reps. Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., and Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., signed onto the bill as co-sponsors last week, Fox News Digital was told, despite House GOP leaders signaling around the same time that they have little appetite to pursue that route.

The resolution now has 22 total co-sponsors – suggesting the effort is still alive and well among conservatives in the House Republican conference.

WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP'S DEPORTATION EFFORTS?

President Donald Trump is using the Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected Tren De Aragua gang members to a detention facility in El Salvador. 

Boasberg's standoff with the Trump administration, which includes accusations the White House ignored his initial order that the administration has denied, has sent shock waves through Capitol Hill. 

Republicans see it as one of the most egregious examples of "rogue judges" blocking Trump's agenda. 

Trump himself singled out Boasberg and called for his impeachment over the legal showdown.

'WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT': US JUDGE REAMS TRUMP ADMIN FOR DAYS-LATE DEPORTATION INFO

More than a dozen injunctions have been levied against various Trump policies, with targets ranging from birthright citizenship reform to the Department of Government Efficiency.

However, House GOP leaders are hesitant to support impeachment as a method to target Boasberg and other judges – believing it to be a less effective route to accountability.

Several rank-and-file Republican lawmakers suggested to Fox News Digital last month that they would not support such a move, giving it long odds of success in the House.

Gill's resolution accused Boasberg of abusing his power.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

He could still force a House-wide vote on the measure by reintroducing it as a "privileged resolution," giving leaders two legislative days to hold at least one procedural vote.

As of last week, however, Gill told Fox News Digital he had no plans to do so.

It comes as House Republicans coalesce around legislation by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., to limit district judges' ability to issue nationwide injunctions. That bill is expected to get a vote on Wednesday afternoon.

House Republicans to go to war with ‘rogue judges’ blocking Trump’s agenda: Here’s their plan

House Republicans are going all out this week to signal their support for the Trump administration amid multiple legal standoffs over White House policy.

A bill to limit U.S. district court judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions sailed through the House Rules Committee – the last gatekeeper for bills before a chamber-wide vote – in a party-line vote Monday evening, as expected.

On Tuesday morning, meanwhile, two high-profile panels on the House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing at 10 a.m. ET on "judicial overreach and constitutional limits on the federal courts."

"Clearly, our members are as angered as President Trump about some of these rogue judges," House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., the No. 2 House Republican, told Fox News Digital in a brief interview. "So we're doing a number of things."

WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP'S DEPORTATION EFFORTS?

The hearing will be held by the House Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on the Constitution, led by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and its subcommittee on courts, led by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.

Notably, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., is expected to testify, as is a woman described as a victim of criminal activity perpetrated by the terrorist organization Tren de Aragua in Aurora, Colorado.

Her appearance is likely linked to the ongoing legal showdown between the Trump administration and U.S. District Judge James Boasberg after he issued an emergency 14-day pause on the White House’s deportation flights of suspected Tren de Aragua gang members to El Salvador.

"We share the president's concern that you've got some judges that have overstepped their boundaries," Scalise said. "I mean, you have a plane flying with hardened criminals ... and Judge Boasberg orders the plane to turn around in mid-flight … and bring hardened criminals back to America who were already here illegally. That's clearly judicial activism and a judge trying to become the executive. That's not his role."

Issa is also spearheading the No Rogue Rulings Act (NORRA Act) to get a House-wide vote this week, which would limit the ability of Boasberg and other district court judges from issuing rulings that affect Trump policies across the country, beyond their direct jurisdiction.

That legislation is likely to pass with little if any Republican dissent. Two people familiar with discussions told Fox News Digital this month that Capitol Hill aides were told Trump "likes" the bill.

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., the No. 3 House Republican, also made clear leadership is united behind this week’s strategy.

"Judges cannot act as pseudo-legislators to advance their political agenda; that’s not how our government works," Emmer told Fox News Digital exclusively in a written statement. "I’m grateful for Chairman Jordan and Congressman Issa’s leadership in House Republicans’ efforts to ensure impartiality on the bench."

'WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT': US JUDGE REAMS TRUMP ADMIN FOR DAYS-LATE DEPORTATION INFO

But it’s clear there’s an appetite among Republican judiciary hawks and conservatives to go further.

Scalise would not go into specifics but vowed, "Everything's being looked at, and all options are on the table."

Democrats are vowing to push back, with Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, accusing Trump of using judges as "scapegoats" for his policy setbacks.

"This week's efforts to distract from Trump’s serial violations of the Spending Clause, the separation of powers, the Birthright Citizenship Clause, Equal Protection, the First Amendment freedom of speech, Fifth Amendment Due Process and Sixth Amendment right to counsel will include a House hearing made for Trump’s viewing pleasure and a vote on a Republican bill to ban nationwide injunctions," Raskin told Fox News Digital.

"As my colleagues embark on this embarrassing diversion, Judiciary Democrats will remind them at every turn: it's not the courts' fault that Trump keeps losing these cases. No amount of finger pointing will shift responsibility from this rogue president who keeps deliberately trashing the Constitution and violating the rights and freedoms of the people of the United States."

There have been over a dozen injunctions levied against various Trump policies across the country, from birthright citizenship reform to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., met privately with Republican judiciary committee members last week for what sources called a "brainstorming" session.

Ideas raised by lawmakers included a fast-tracked appeals process, wielding Congress’ spending power over the judiciary, and limiting the ability to "judge shop."

And some conservatives are eager to target specific judges they believe are abusing their power via the impeachment process, but House Republican leaders are wary of that route and believe it to be less effective than other legislative avenues.

Conservatives could still force Johnson’s hand by filing a "privileged" impeachment resolution, meaning the House would have to at least hold a procedural vote on the measure within two legislative days.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital is not aware of any current plans to do so, and Johnson assured Republicans at their closed-door meeting last week that he was in contact with the White House every step of the way.

Trump’s GOP Senate allies are rolling out their own strategy to push back on activist judges in the coming days, with the Senate Judiciary Committee teeing up a similar hearing to the House’s Tuesday event.

How Mike Johnson and Jim Jordan could hit back at judges blocking Trump’s agenda

Congressional Republicans are looking at a variety of options to stand up against what they see as "activist judges" blocking President Donald Trump’s agenda.

Many of those options will likely be discussed at the House Judiciary's hearing on the matter next week, which sources expect to be scheduled for April 1.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., huddled privately with Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday afternoon to coalesce lawmakers around a bill up for a vote next week that would limit federal district court judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions.

One source familiar with discussions told Fox News Digital that Johnson suggested Republicans could look at other options as well, something conservatives are looking for. House Freedom Caucus member Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., told Fox News Digital that the legislation was a "good start."

WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP'S DEPORTATION EFFORTS?

The No Rogue Rulings Act has support from both the White House and House GOP leadership. It’s expected to get a House-wide vote Tuesday or Wednesday of next week.

Led by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the legislation would force most district court judges to narrow most orders to the most relevant scope, therefore blocking them from pausing Trump’s policies across the U.S.

No Republican lawmaker has publicly expressed doubts about the bill, but conservatives have warned they want to see more from Congress on activist judges.

Both Johnson and top members of the House Judiciary Committee have floated using Congress’ power of the purse to rein in activist courts.

"We do have authority over the federal courts," Johnson said at his weekly press conference. "We do have power over funding, over the courts, and all these other things. But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act."

But Congress controls government spending through several different mechanisms. Lawmakers have the power to set annual appropriations levels, to rescind that funding via a rescission package, and even leverage funding outside of Congress' yearly appropriations via the budget reconciliation process.

"I think we need to look at… funding scenarios. Now, that takes a little time; you've got to work through either the appropriations, rescissions or reconciliation process, depending on where it's appropriate," Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, chair of the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on the Constitution, told Fox News Digital last week – while stressing he was not "for or against" any specific scenario.

Several Republicans have introduced resolutions to impeach various federal judges for blocking Trump's agenda, but there appears to be little appetite within the House GOP to pursue that lane.

Johnson signaled he was against the move during a closed-door meeting with Republicans on Tuesday morning, noting just 15 federal judges have been impeached in U.S. history.

'WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT': US JUDGE REAMS TRUMP ADMIN FOR DAYS-LATE DEPORTATION INFO

"There was some innuendo there that, you know, impeachment has been reserved for judges with high crimes and misdemeanors, not because you disagree with his decisions," one House Republican said of Johnson's message. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Conservatives could attempt to force House GOP leaders to act by classifying their impeachment legislation as a "privileged resolution," meaning the House must hold at least a chamber-wide procedural vote on the measure within two legislative days.

But it's not clear that will be pursued, either. Two Republicans who filed such resolutions – Reps. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, and Derrick Van Orden, R-Wis. – said they did not have current plans to make their resolutions privileged.

It's not a totally dismissed option, however, as leaders, including House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, continue to insist nothing is off the table.