Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) has decided another stern statement about judicial overreach won't do. The Tennessee Republican introduced articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs after she again stopped President Donald Trump's administration from ending Temporary Protected Status for Somali nationals.
🚨 I have just introduced articles of impeachment against radical judicial activist Judge Allison Burroughs for ignoring the Supreme Court and attempting to force mass migration from Somalia into American communities.
— Rep. Andy Ogles (@RepOgles) August 3, 2026
America is not Africa’s dumping ground. We will end Temporary… pic.twitter.com/hzUtjM146x
Ogles accuses Burroughs of defying federal law and the Supreme Court. Her latest stay keeps deportation protection and work authorization in place for roughly 1,100 Somalis while their lawsuit continues.
President Barack Hussein Obama appointed Burroughs to the federal bench in 2014.
The confrontation began with a January decision by the Department of Homeland Security. After reviewing conditions in Somalia, the department concluded the country no longer met the legal requirements for TPS and set March 17 as the termination date.
Somalia first received the temporary protection in 1991.
Federal law gives the DHS secretary authority to review, extend, or terminate a country's designation. It also says courts may not review the secretary's decision concerning a designation, extension, or termination. Congress wrote those limits, and the executive branch acted under them.
The Supreme Court reinforced those limits on June 25. In Mullin v. Doe, the justices held that Syrian and Haitian TPS plaintiffs weren't entitled to court orders postponing termination while their cases moved forward. The court said the statute bars judicial review of nonconstitutional challenges to TPS decisions.
The fact that the Trump administration isn't defying this judicial act of lawfare proves again that he's the world's worst tyrant.
The Somali plaintiffs changed their legal theory after the ruling; their amended complaint alleges racial and national-origin discrimination under the Fifth Amendment. Burroughs used that constitutional claim to preserve TPS while deciding whether the revised case can proceed.
From Fox News:
But the latest stay order is based on an amended complaint by the plaintiffs aiming to account for that ruling.
Ogles argued in his impeachment resolution, "In issuing this stay, Judge Burroughs attempted to get around the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mullin v. Doe by entertaining spurious allegations of racial and national-origin discrimination against an Administration that has chosen to not renew a single temporary protected status designation."
"This judicial activist's obstruction of the people's will must be stopped," Ogles told Fox News Digital. "Judge Burroughs must be impeached."
TPS is a humanitarian program providing safe harbor in the U.S. for people who fled natural disasters or war in their home countries.
Ogles' impeachment resolution is one of several that has been filed by Trump allies in Congress so far during the president's second term.
A significant effort to pursue impeachment against U.S. federal judge James Boasberg fell flat last year after senior House Republicans argued it was not the most effective way to rein in what they called "rogue" judges.
The legal wrinkle belongs in the story because Ogles' accusation should rest on the actual record. He believes Burroughs accepted a repackaged claim to reach the same result the Supreme Court had just blocked. His resolution accuses her of defiance, obstruction, and delay.
Federal judges must be able to rule against presidents without fearing removal whenever Congress dislikes the result. Judicial independence, however, doesn't place a judge above limits imposed by Congress or decisions handed down by the Supreme Court. A constitutional label can't automatically defeat a statute that bars judicial review.
Impeachment is a grave remedy, and Ogles will need to establish more than legal error or aggressive judging. Historical practice protects federal judges from removal based solely on political disagreement with their rulings. His resolution begins the debate over whether Burroughs crossed from interpretation into deliberate obstruction.
Burroughs has kept a temporary program alive after the responsible cabinet department ended it and after the Supreme Court narrowed judicial interference. Ogles is forcing Congress to confront a question judges rarely face: who holds the judiciary accountable when a court keeps finding new ways to preserve the same blocked policy?
PJ Media VIP follows the court battles shaping President Trump’s agenda long after the first headline fades. Join today and save 60% with promo code FIGHT.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member