Congressional Republicans are gunning for Rhode Island Federal Judge John McConnell Jr.’s impeachment, claiming he’s got a conflict of interest, according to The Federalist.
They’re joined by America First Legal (AFL), which slapped a judicial complaint on McConnell’s desk, accusing him of ethical missteps in a high-stakes case. The MAGA crowd smells bias, and they’re not shy about saying so.
In March 2025, Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., led the charge with a resolution backed by nine cosponsors, alleging McConnell committed “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
AFL followed on March 24, filing a 17-page complaint urging Chief Judge David Barron to probe McConnell’s conduct. The duo’s beef? McConnell’s ruling in New York v. Trump, where he sided with 22 states and D.C. against the Trump administration’s pause on federal funding for DEI programs.
McConnell, a long-time board member at Crossroads Rhode Island, a $31 million nonprofit, allegedly stood to gain from his ruling. Crossroads, which tackles housing and homelessness, gets over half its cash from federal funds funneled through the state. In 2025 alone, it pocketed $4.5 million, likely from Uncle Sam’s wallet.
AFL’s complaint pulls no punches, claiming McConnell’s ties to Crossroads create a glaring conflict. “McConnell has a personal interest in the litigation’s outcome,” AFL argues, suggesting his ruling keeps Crossroads flush with cash. Judges, by law, must dodge even the whiff of impropriety, yet McConnell didn’t recuse himself.
The New York v. Trump case saw McConnell order the Trump administration to restart funding it had paused to review DEI alignment. This move, AFL says, directly props up Crossroads’ operations. It’s like a chef judging his cooking contest—hardly impartial.
“When Judge McConnell ordered the federal government to resume payments, he ensured that an organization on whose board he has sat would continue receiving tens of millions,” AFL’s complaint states.
That’s a zinger that stings, raising questions about judicial fairness. If true, McConnell’s ruling could be less about justice and more about self-preservation.
McConnell’s history doesn’t help his case. He’s donated nearly $700,000 to Democratic causes and once led Rhode Island Planned Parenthood. His public jabs at Trump, comparing the former president’s term to the Civil War and Jim Crow, don’t exactly scream neutrality.
The impeachment resolution cites these remarks as evidence of bias. When a judge calls a president a “tyrant,” it’s tough to argue he’s an unbiased referee. Actions, as they say, have consequences.
AFL’s complaint doubles down, noting McConnell’s ruling could “either keep Crossroads in business or jeopardize its continued existence.”
That’s a bold claim, implying McConnell’s gavel swings with personal stakes. The complaint’s now in Chief Judge Barron’s hands, who’s stayed mum despite inquiries.
The Rhode Island Bar Association, where McConnell’s a member, rushed to his defense. “Judge McConnell is a well-respected jurist,” they declared, calling the criticism “unfounded.” But their undated statement feels like a reflex, not a rebuttal.
“The criticism of his decision is unwarranted and demonstrates a disregard for judicial independence,” the Bar added. Nice try, but waving the “independence” flag doesn’t erase the question of whether McConnell’s ties to Crossroads clouded his judgment. Sympathy for a local judge shouldn’t trump scrutiny.
McConnell’s chief deputy clerk said the judge won’t comment on pending cases or complaints. That’s standard, but it leaves the public in the dark. Silence might be golden, but it’s not exactly clarifying.
This saga underscores a deeper issue: Can judges with deep ties to federally funded organizations rule impartially on cases affecting those funds? McConnell’s case isn’t unique, but it’s a lightning rod for conservatives fed up with perceived liberal bias in the judiciary. The anti-woke crowd sees this as a textbook example of the system protecting its own.