Bill · H.Res. 1354· House(119-HRES-1354)
Impeaching John McConnell, Jr., Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
- Introduced
- 6/9/2026
- Last activity
- 6/9/2026 — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- W. Steube
- Cosponsors
- None
- Introduced
- In Committee
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution officially impeaches John McConnell, Jr., who is the Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island. The filing accuses him of high crimes and misdemeanors, specifically citing abuse of judicial discretion, dereliction of duty, and endangerment of public safety. The charges stem from a June 5, 2026, court order issued by Judge McConnell. In that order, he vacated a United States Citizenship and Immigration Services policy framework that had paused certain asylum applications and immigration benefit requests. The text argues that by issuing this order, Judge McConnell dismissed national security justifications and prioritized the interests of noncitizens over public safety. Ultimately, the resolution states that he is unfit to hold office and should be removed.
Yes
Does this give the federal government more power?+3
The resolution asserts congressional oversight power over the judiciary through impeachment regarding national security and executive policy implementation.
The opposite
Does this tighten control of the border?-5
The resolution initiates impeachment proceedings against a judge for overturning executive branch immigration pauses, reflecting a conflict over border and vetting policies.
Would immigrants be better off under this?-4
The resolution targets judicial actions that mandate the resumption of immigration benefit processing, aligning with a stance against eased asylum and benefit application frameworks.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Protection of noncitizen access to benefits: According to Article I, section (1), Judge McConnell issued an order vacating policies that paused asylum applications and pending immigration benefit requests. For individuals or groups seeking immigration benefits, this could be seen as positive because it mandates that the processing of these benefits resume rather than remain paused.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- National security and public safety risks: According to Article I, sections (1), (2), and (3), Judge McConnell's order vacated policies designed to ensure that persons from high-risk countries entering the United States do not present threats to national security or public safety. This could be considered a negative impact because the text states that his actions marginalized core public safety and national security considerations, contributed to an environment of impunity for terrorism, and interfered with the executive branch's ability to mitigate risks.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Border Security-5
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Immigrants-4
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power+3
- 6/9/2026
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.