US Federal House Bill HR1346

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Committee Review: 6/8/26

Caption

Impeaching Eleanor L. Ross, Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Summary

H. Res. 1346 is a House resolution impeaching Eleanor L. Ross, a U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Georgia, for alleged high crimes and misdemeanors. The resolution sets out a single article of impeachment alleging that Judge Ross engaged in sexual intercourse with a high-ranking Atlanta Police Department official in her federal courthouse chambers during business hours while presiding over criminal cases, and that the conduct occurred within earshot of judicial staff. The resolution further alleges that Judge Ross made false and misleading statements to the Eleventh Circuit Chief Judge and the Chief Judge of the Northern District of Georgia when asked about the conduct, including denying that any sexual intercourse occurred in her office or elsewhere in the courthouse. It states that she later admitted the falsehoods only after an investigation had already required review of security footage, sign-in logs, interviews, background research, and laboratory testing. Based on these allegations, the resolution concludes that she is unfit to continue in office and should be removed by the Senate.

Impact

If adopted by the House, the resolution would formally impeach Judge Ross and transmit an article of impeachment to the Senate for trial. It does not amend Georgia law or the U.S. Code, but it would affect the federal judiciary by initiating the constitutional removal process for a sitting Article III judge. The practical impact would be on Judge Ross personally, on the administration of the Northern District of Georgia, and on the broader oversight and discipline of federal judges.

Sentiment

The bill text is strongly condemnatory and presents the allegations as serious misconduct warranting removal. Because there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided material, there is no evidence of broader legislative debate or bipartisan support/opposition. The available context suggests the resolution was introduced as an impeachment measure and then referred to the House Judiciary Committee, indicating the matter was still at an early procedural stage.

Contention

The central contention is whether the alleged conduct occurred as described and whether it rises to the level of impeachable misconduct. The resolution’s sponsors assert that Judge Ross lied to judicial leaders and obstructed the investigation, while the allegations themselves involve both personal misconduct and abuse of judicial office. Any defense would likely focus on the sufficiency and credibility of the evidence, the severity of the conduct, and whether impeachment is the appropriate remedy. No contrary positions are included in the provided record.