If Congress Won’t Stop Rogue Judges, The DOJ Should Prosecute Them
It is increasingly clear that judges are a significant bottleneck within the current legal system, with the potential to obstruct many of the most urgently needed reforms in our country.
In an egregious example, former Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan was recently convicted of felony obstruction after she actually attempted to aid an illegal alien (charged with battery) to escape ICE agents. Thankfully, her efforts were thwarted, and she was prosecuted for obstruction of justice. Despite being convicted, the federal judge presiding over the cases, Lynn Adelman, only sentenced Dugan to a $5,000 fine and no prison time. Dugan has resigned from her judicial office, but it is frustrating that so little repercussion has followed her gross abuse of judicial office.
Or consider how, after being repeatedly released by local judges, DeCarlos Brown brutally murdered Iryna Zarutska in August 2025, but is now determined by a federal judge to be “incompetent to stand trial.” Such examples of judges corrupting justice could be multiplied endlessly.
At every turn, the abuse of the judicial office is one of the most flagrant injustices and one of the most stalwart impediments to necessary reforms. Almost every problem runs through the bottleneck of the judges, given that in our current system, we elect the executive to enforce the laws, but the actual trials and sentencing will be presided over by state or federal judges.
Unless we can control or change the judges, we will not be able to truly restore our communities with much-needed law enforcement, criminal punishments, and accountability.
The Problem with Impeachment
It is a common refrain among right-wing figures in media to talk about the need to “impeach the judges.” In an encouraging step, Florida’s Attorney General James Uthmeier recently led the way by filing articles of impeachment against Miami Judge Miguel De La O, who let a black woman walk free because of an alleged “psychotic break,” despite her having drowned her baby and stabbed other family members.
As is the case in most states, the impeachment process involves articles of impeachment being filed in the House of the state legislature. Impeachment (essentially an indictment for “misdemeanor in office”) requires simply a majority vote, but typically the other house (i.e., Senate) must vote to actually achieve removal, which usually requires a two-thirds majority. This is why impeachment will prove such a difficult path to take, given that most state legislatures do not possess such overwhelming Republican majorities in the upper house. In blue states, it will not be possible to impeach the judges, and even in red states, it will be very difficult to actually get corrupt judges removed this way.
The same problem applies to federal judges, who could be impeached by Congress. Despite federal judges grossly abusing their offices by making up all kinds of illogical, inconsistent, and unconstitutional justifications to stop actions taken by the Trump administration — and despite these judges’ rulings often being overturned by the higher courts — it will prove very difficult to remove them. It would require a majority vote in the House to impeach, which would require all the Republicans voting together, and a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate, which is effectively impossible any time soon.
What Can Be Done?
One measure at the federal level would be to use Republican congressional majorities to ram through reforms to the courts. The Constitution leaves the entire structure of the federal judiciary — includinfg the makeup and composition of the Supreme Court — to Congress. With a determined Republican majority and the president’s signature, Congress could reorganize the judiciary, create more judicial offices, and confirm a plethora of new conservative judges.
Even if they could not get rid of existing federal judges, it would be possible to “dilute” their influence by appointing and confirming more right-wing judges, requiring district courts to hear cases in multi-judge panels instead of by single judges, controlling the kind of relief the lower courts can issue, and so on. All of this is possible if the Republicans in Congress were willing to fight with the same aggressive tactics that the left has been using for decades. Prominent Democrats routinely call for packing the Supreme Court and other courts if they can retake national power, and Republicans would be foolish to bind themselves by procedures which our existential opponents will not hesitate to employ against us for our destruction.
At the state level, red states have many options if they are willing to fight. In cases where judges are elected, Republicans should pour money, time, and effort into unseating corrupt judges and replacing them with better candidates. Even if the judges are insulated from easy removal, the red state legislatures could use the same tactics I outlined above to control their state judiciaries, pack the courts if needed, or even amend their state constitutions to otherwise control the judiciary.
One more possibility, which would certainly upset the establishment and the left, would be for President Trump’s DOJ to find ways to creatively charge and prosecute corrupt judges under existing laws. Would this be radical? Yes, but not arguably any more radical than the subversion of America we have witnessed by a leftist judiciary.
A major obstacle here, though, is that — barring extraordinary measures like special military tribunals — any attempt to prosecute corrupt judges will be presided over by other judges in the courts. Judicial obstruction is a real challenge at every turn, as was demonstrated when Trump’s DOJ attempted to bring James Comey or Letitia James to justice.
Any successful means of getting rid of or reducing the power of the judges will require breaking precedents and norms. Of course, it is unfortunate that we are in this situation, but this is the result of decades of aggressive leftist judicial activism to achieve their desired political ends. It is better to resort to extraordinary measures to preserve the ends of government than to let the ends of government fail by blindly maintaining procedures and formalism, no matter the consequences. Given a decade of lawfare against Trump and his supporters, the inevitable cries of the left against any extraordinary measures from the right should ring hollow.
While the seemingly ubiquitous travesties of the judicial office are to be lamented, it can actually be useful since it removes any hint of their objectivity or legitimacy, showcasing rather just how corrupt and nakedly partisan the judiciary is. The out-of-control judiciary has provided much occasion for President Trump and other key admin figures like J.D. Vance and Stephen Miller to launch a nonstop campaign to delegitimize the judiciary before the audience of the American electorate.
Corrupt judges maintain their power because the perceived weight of the establishment upholds them. We must delegitimize them in the eyes of the public. Their judicial office does not make them sacred, especially if they routinely perpetrate injustices and trample the rights of American citizens to be protected in their life, liberty, and property.
If the right can ultimately resort to extraordinary measures to break the power of the corrupt judges, that will only be achieved upon a broad base of popular support from conservative voters who staunchly back President Trump and his agenda and are incensed by the nonstop judicial interference. It is long past time to break the power of these judges to save America.
Post a Comment