Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ) is escalating the Republican response to a federal judge’s decision blocking a key Trump administration election integrity initiative, announcing plans to introduce articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan later this week.
Hamadeh said Monday that he intends to file the articles on Thursday, arguing the Biden-appointed judge exceeded her constitutional authority when she halted implementation of the Trump administration’s revised Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database.
“Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan’s egregious overreaching ruling blocking President Trump’s common-sense effort to verify the citizenship of those who want to vote in our elections was the final straw,” Hamadeh wrote on X.
“It was a blatant and unlawful subversion of the President’s executive authority and a direct assault on election integrity,” he continued. “On Thursday, Congressman Hamadeh will be introducing articles of impeachment to remove her from the bench and restore the rule of law.”
In a separate post, Hamadeh accused rogue judges of undermining the rule of law, writing that Sooknanan’s “power grab against President Trump cannot be tolerated.”
The controversy stems from Sooknanan’s ruling last month blocking the administration’s modified SAVE database, which combines Department of Homeland Security citizenship records with Social Security Administration data to help states verify whether individuals registering to vote are American citizens.
The Trump administration has argued the updated system is designed to strengthen election integrity by giving states better tools to identify ineligible noncitizen registrants while maintaining accurate voter rolls.
In her 75-page opinion, however, Sooknanan concluded the administration likely violated both the Privacy Act and the Social Security Act by sharing the revised database with states before addressing concerns about its accuracy.
She cited reports that some eligible American citizens had reportedly been incorrectly identified as noncitizens, leading to canceled voter registrations.
“The federal government has knowingly trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens in a manner that threatens the sacred right to vote,” Sooknanan wrote. “This Court cannot stand idly by while that happens.”
The Justice Department has disputed that conclusion and has already indicated it plans to appeal the ruling.
Administration officials argue that any isolated inaccuracies do not justify blocking the entire program and maintain that the revised SAVE system would provide states with a valuable tool for maintaining accurate voter registration lists.
The case carries particular significance in Arizona, where election integrity has become one of the state’s most contentious political issues.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen filed an amicus brief supporting the administration, arguing that Sooknanan should have granted a stay because election preparations were already underway.
“The public interest favors maintaining existing election-related processes and systems for States while the appeal proceeds,” the brief stated, noting that numerous state and local agencies rely on the modified SAVE system to verify voter eligibility and maintain accurate voter rolls.
The ruling has also fueled broader Republican criticism of the federal judiciary.
Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt recently questioned Sooknanan’s dual-citizenship following the decision, while Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) renewed her proposal for a constitutional amendment requiring federal judges, members of Congress, and Senate-confirmed executive branch officials to be natural-born American citizens.
Last week, the watchdog group Democracy Restored filed a bar complaint against Sooknanan, alleging dishonesty and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice stemming from her previous service as a senior Justice Department official.
Despite Hamadeh’s announcement, the impeachment effort faces steep constitutional and political hurdles.
Federal judges serving under Article III of the Constitution hold lifetime appointments and can only be removed through impeachment by the House of Representatives followed by conviction in the Senate.
Even if House Republicans were able to approve articles of impeachment by a simple majority, removal would require the support of two-thirds of the Senate—a threshold widely viewed as unattainable under the current political landscape.
Historically, judicial impeachment has been exceedingly rare. In the nation’s 250-year history, only eight federal judges have ultimately been removed from office following impeachment and Senate conviction.
READ NEXT: Federal Judge Blocks Trump-Backed Voter Roll Citizenship Database
