Senator Says Judge’s Block On Defunding Planned Parenthood ‘Impeachable’
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, is signaling that impeachment proceedings may be justified against U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani after she moved to block a key pro-life measure in President Donald J. Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act — a sweeping legislative package central to the administration’s effort to restore constitutional governance.
Talwani, an Obama-appointed judge, issued a ruling late Tuesday temporarily stopping enforcement of a provision cutting off federal Medicaid dollars to Planned Parenthood in 22 states. The law was passed by Congress specifically to ensure that taxpayer money no longer indirectly subsidizes the nation’s largest abortion provider.
In her decision, Talwani argued that Congress may have exceeded its constitutional authority in crafting the defunding mechanism — a justification Republican lawmakers immediately blasted as judicial overreach and ideological interference in what is unmistakably a legislative prerogative.
The ruling quickly drew outrage from conservative leaders, who say the judiciary has once again inserted itself into political battles that voters resolved at the ballot box when they elected President Trump and a Republican-led Congress. According to Newsmax, several GOP lawmakers accused Talwani of substituting her policy preferences for the law.
Sen. Lee — a longtime constitutional scholar and former federal prosecutor — took to X to condemn the ruling and warn that such actions could warrant the most serious congressional response available.
“It would take an act of Congress to defund Planned Parenthood. So Congress did precisely that. To suggest Congress somehow lacks the authority to do that is insane — and potentially impeachable,” Lee wrote.
While impeachment of a federal judge is rare, legal experts acknowledge Congress has clear authority to remove judges for misconduct, abuse of office, or violations of constitutional duty. The threshold is high — but not impossible, especially when the judiciary repeatedly attempts to obstruct the will of the elected branches.
Republican architects of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act say the legislation’s structure — bundling several appropriations directives into one sweeping measure — was designed precisely to prevent activist courts from employing procedural loopholes to shield Planned Parenthood from accountability. For years, lawmakers have complained that bureaucrats and left-wing judges have helped the organization dodge restrictions that voters consistently support.
Planned Parenthood, meanwhile, praised Talwani’s ruling. In a statement to Politico, the organization said the court “again recognized the ‘defund’ law for what it is: unconstitutional and dangerous.”
Judicial Conference Scandal Adds Fuel to the Fire
In a parallel battle over judicial power, Mike Davis — founder of the Article III Project and former clerk to Justice Neil Gorsuch — is leveling sharp accusations at Chief Justice John Roberts, alleging he has allowed the lower courts to engage in “judicial sabotage” against President Trump’s second-term agenda.
In an interview with Joe Piscopo, Davis discussed a newly filed lawsuit targeting Roberts in his role as head of the U.S. Judicial Conference, along with Robert J. Conrad, who leads the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The suit asserts that both entities have engaged in unconstitutional regulatory actions far beyond the judiciary’s adjudicative role.
The lawsuit also argues that records kept by the Judicial Conference — often shielded from public scrutiny — should now qualify for FOIA requests due to their alleged policymaking activities.
Davis did not hold back in his critique of the Chief Justice.
“I actually like the Chief Justice… but I would say this to the Chief Justice: you have failed to do your job as the Chief Justice of the United States when you have allowed these radical activist judges to sabotage the president’s Article II powers,” Davis said.
He added, “This is an assault on American voters. This is a repudiation of American voters by lifetime appointment, paycheck-protected federal judges… This is not judicial review. This is judicial sabotage.”
The mounting clashes between Congress, the judiciary, and the Trump administration underscore a broader struggle over constitutional authority — one that conservatives argue is being undermined by activist judges determined to block policies voters have repeatedly endorsed.