A Florida congressman has launched a formal effort to remove a federal judge from the bench, claiming a recent immigration ruling puts American lives at risk. U.S. Representative Greg Steube, a Republican representing Florida’s 17th district, introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives to impeach John McConnell, Jr., the Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island.
Background of the Case
The tension stems from a June 5 decision handed down by Judge McConnell in the case of Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). In that ruling, McConnell struck down a federal policy framework that paused asylum applications and pending immigration benefit requests for individuals from what the government categorized as high-risk countries who entered the U.S. on or after January 20, 2021.
Representative Steube argues that blocking these restrictions creates an immediate gap in national security. “Judge McConnell put the interests of illegal immigrants seeking immigration benefits above the national security of the United States,” Steube said in a statement. “By issuing an order vacating policies designed to keep citizens from high-risk countries from posing a threat to public safety, he interfered with the executive branch’s ability to keep Americans safe.”
Impeachment Resolution
The single article of impeachment alleges abuse of judicial discretion, dereliction of duty, and endangerment of public safety. According to the filing, McConnell actively ignored recent domestic terror cases that the policy framework was designed to prevent.
The resolution specifically points to two events involving Afghan nationals: the June 2025 guilty plea of Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, who admitted to plotting an Election Day ISIS attack in the U.S., and a November 2025 attack against two National Guard members in Washington, D.C., carried out by Rahmanullah Lakanwal.
Steube’s resolution claims McConnell dismissed the White House’s security arguments as “pretextual” and allowed personal hostility toward the administration’s border rules to cloud his legal judgment. By forcing USCIS to resume processing applications from countries that lack rigorous vetting protocols, the resolution argues, the judge damaged the rule of law and compromised public safety.
Original reporting: Tampa Free Press — read the source article.
