U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs
About time, but I doubt they will convict her, because it wold take at least 7 Democrats to vote against their own poltical party, if ll Republicans voted to convict.
Posted on 08/02/2026 9:34:09 AM PDT by Signalman
U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) has announced plans to file articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs over her recent order related to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for thousands of Somali nationals.
Burroghs, an Obama appointee, serves as a judge on the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. She recently made a highly controversial ruling related to Temporary Protected Status, which allows eligible nationals of designated countries to remain in the United States and obtain work authorization when conditions in their home country, such as armed conflict or other extraordinary circumstances, make safe return difficult.
The Secretary of Homeland Security has authority to designate, extend, or terminate TPS designations. The statute includes a provision stating that there shall be no judicial review of any determination of the Secretary with respect to the designation, termination, or extension of a designation.
This past January, then-DHS Secretary Kristi Noem published a notice terminating the TPS designation for Somalia, effective March 17, 2026. Plaintiffs, including advocacy groups and individuals, filed suit in the District of Massachusetts challenging the termination. Burroughs initially entered an administrative stay of the termination’s effective date while the case proceeded almost immediately after Noem’s order was handed down.
On June 25, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 opinion that the judicial-review bar in the TPS statute precludes non-constitutional claims challenging terminations. The decision reversed lower-court stays that had postponed terminations for Haiti and Syria and remanded those matters. Constitutional claims remain theoretically available, though the Court found the equal-protection argument presented in the Haiti litigation unlikely to succeed.
Days before Judge Burroughs’ latest action, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed comparable administrative stays issued by other district judges that had delayed TPS terminations for Ethiopia and South Sudan, applying the framework set out in the prior case, Mullin v. Doe. Then, on July 30, the plaintiffs in the Somalia case filed an amended complaint and an emergency motion.
The amended pleading centered on Fifth Amendment claims, asserting that the termination violated due-process requirements because the decision had been predetermined and that it violated equal-protection guarantees by discriminating on the basis of race and national origin. The plaintiffs pointed to public statements by President Trump concerning Somali immigrants as evidence of the alleged motivations.
A day later, Judge Burroughs issued a fresh administrative stay. The order continued to prevent the termination of Somalia’s TPS designation from taking effect, declaring the termination void for the time being while the court considered whether any of the claims in the amended complaint could support longer-term relief. The stay applies to approximately 1,100 individuals holding TPS based on the Somalia designation.
Department of Homeland Security General Counsel James Percival sharply criticized the ruling in a social media post. “Judge Allison Burroughs just entered yet another order preventing the termination of Somalia TPS. There is no serious debate about what is going on in these cases—defiance, obstruction, and delay,” he wrote.
Because the Supreme Court has already addressed the statutory bar on judicial review of non-constitutional challenges to TPS terminations, and because parallel stays in other circuits have been reversed on the strength of that precedent, the district court’s continued administrative stay may be interpreted as an effort to maintain judicial intervention in a field where the highest court has already defined the limited scope of review and where the core reviewability questions have been litigated.
In response to the move, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) announced plans to file articles of impeachment against the Obama-appointed judge. “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 congressman posted on X.
Ogles has previously introduced or cosponsored impeachment resolutions directed at other federal judges whose rulings conflicted with administration policies. Under the Constitution, removal of a federal judge requires a majority vote of the House of Representatives to impeach followed by a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict. Such proceedings remain rare.
This kind of crap has to end.
This will have as much effect as the Strongly Worded Letter that he sent last week.
Complete crap. Eliminate the court through simple majorities. This is theater of the absurd. I wish someone would ask Congress why they don’t just eliminate these courts.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson overseas the US First District Court. Part of her job is to enforce USSC decisions when they get violated at the district court level. I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
I believe its lawful to transfer judges to a new district. Move this guy to some far away district.
About time, but I doubt they will convict her, because it wold take at least 7 Democrats to vote against their own poltical party, if ll Republicans voted to convict.
They always look the part.
Democrats will keep hammering on the constitution until they get rid of it one way or another.
“federal judges”
The defendant in a federal case might be allowed to exclude say at least 40% of the federal judges in a district.
The plaintiff in a federal case might be allowed to exclude say at least 20% of the federal judges in a district.
Then there might be challenges for cause, such as being able to exclude a foreign-born judge in an immigration, asylum, or removal case.
Jurors may be excluded by long-established similar means.
Yes, and they tend to be female, or could it be a transgender pretending to be a woman Hard to tell tiwh that one. 🤣👍
“The defendant in a federal case might be allowed to exclude say at least 40% of the federal judges in a district.
The plaintiff in a federal case might be allowed to exclude say at least 20% of the federal judges in a district.
Then there might be challenges for cause, such as being able to exclude a foreign-born judge in an immigration, asylum, or removal case.
Jurors may be excluded by long-established similar means.”
__________________________________________________________
I don’t know where you learned law or how to practice before a federal court, but anyone taking up your plan will be abandoning their own profession and future.
Unless you’re making a challenge for cause, all you’re going to do is piss off the judge and make life harder for youself and, most importantly, your client.
“About time, but I doubt they will convict her, because it wold take at least 7 Democrats to vote against their own poltical party, if ll Republicans voted to convict.”
____________________________________________________________
This won’t even make it to a committee vote, much less a floor vote.
There is commercial airline service to Mogadishu:
https://www.kayak.com/flights/LAX-MGQ/2026-08-26?ucs=1gcvgdn&sort=bestflight_a
If it is possible to get international airline service to a country or send money to a country, TPS for that country’s nationals should end.
“Unless you’re making a challenge for cause, all you’re going to do is piss off the judge and make life harder for youself and, most importantly, your client.”
The defendant is Trump or a member of his cabinet. The leftist judge already doesn’t like Trump.
*****************************************
My client hired a third party for judge vetting. My client insisted on deferring to their judgement over my objections.
Defense lawyers are good at crafting excuses.
ILL GET BANNED, AGAIN
RIGHTINSEATTLE
“Jury selection assistance consists of Focus Litigation Consulting attending jury selection to collect, track and analyze the response, demeanor, and nonverbal communication of each potential juror, so that the trial team can most effectively recognize and de-select jurors with bias and inappropriate psychological pre-dispositions to a case and obtain the best possible jury panel. Focus Litigation Consulting will assist the trial team in the effective and strategic exercise of peremptory challenges and in making informed challenges for cause.”
https://focuslitigation.com/services/jury-selection/
Defiance is needed, not another doomed impeachment effort.
According to AI, there are six judges currently called for impeachment.
A few judicial impeachment/conviction scalps a year would do wonders.
Let me dream.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.