This week: Lawmakers return as Amash fallout looms
© Greg Nash

Lawmakers are returning to Washington this week amid the fallout of Rep. Justin AmashJustin AmashAmash: 'Bolton never should have been hired' Romney: Bolton firing 'a huge loss' for nation Amash says Sanford presidential bid won't impact decision on whether he runs in 2020 MORE’s (Mich.) decision to leave the Republican Party. 

With a relatively quiet legislative week, much of the focus is likely to be on Amash, whose decision last week roiled members of Congress. 

Amash’s July 4 op-ed in The Washington Post announcing he was leaving the party reignited backlash from Republicans, which initially sparked after he said he believed the lower chamber should begin impeachment proceedings against President TrumpDonald John TrumpSupreme Court comes to Trump's aid on immigration Trump is failing on trade policy Trump holds call with Netanyahu to discuss possible US-Israel defense treaty MORE in May. 

"Today, I am declaring my independence and leaving the Republican Party," Amash wrote in the Washington Post opinion piece. "No matter your circumstance, I’m asking you to join me in rejecting the partisan loyalties and rhetoric that divide and dehumanize us. I’m asking you to believe that we can do better than this two-party system — and to work toward it. If we continue to take America for granted, we will lose it."

Amash’s decision has already sparked days of political fallout, but Congress's return from the July 4th recess is prompting additional questions, including the future of his membership in the House Republican Conference and his committee assignments.

House Republican Conference Vice Chairman Mark WalkerBradley (Mark) Mark WalkerTo boost minority serving institutions, bipartisan Future Act needs immediate action Pressure rises on Cheney to make decision NCAA urges California governor not to sign 'fair pay' bill for college athletes MORE (N.C.) has been the first high-profile member of GOP leadership to call for the Michigan lawmaker to no longer conference with the GOP. 

“Amash left the @freedomcaucus now he’s leaving the @GOP. The @HouseGOP never left @justinamash - we simply ran out of space for his ego. However, we should make sure he leaves Conference and his committee,” Walker tweeted following Amash’s announcement of his decision to leave the GOP. 

A two-thirds vote within the House GOP conference would be required to expel him from conferencing with the party. House Republicans are likely to meet as a caucus on Wednesday for the first time since Amash’s announcement. 

It remains unclear what will happen to his committee assignments in the wake of his decision. 

“I anticipate I may be kicked off [the House Oversight and Reform Committee]. … I've tried to make changes from within. … I have colleagues trying every day, but they are not speaking out the same way. I hope they will speak out,” he told CNN on Sunday. 

President Trump praised his decision to exit the Republican party, blasting him as one of the “dumbest & most disloyal men in Congress.”

“Great news for the Republican Party as one of the dumbest & most disloyal men in Congress is ‘quitting’ the Party. No Collusion, No Obstruction! Knew he couldn’t get the nomination to run again in the Great State of Michigan. Already being challenged for his seat. A total loser!” he tweeted. 

Amash’s decision to exit the party while in office is highly unusual. 

"Amash is the first Republican House member in 20 years to leave the GOP," Antoine Yoshinaka, a political science professor at the New York State University at Buffalo, told USA Today.

The publication also notes that Amash is the third Republican lawmaker to leave the party since 2000, along with then-GOP Sens. Arlen Specter (Pa.) and Jim Jeffords (Vt.). 

Amash’s decision to leave the party paves the way for Republicans, including the National Republican Campaign Committee, to back a GOP challenger to try to unseat him next year.

Top Republicans had already stated that they expected a well-funded primary challenge against the Michigan libertarian after his impeachment remarks earlier this year. 

But Amash said Sunday that "high-level" Republican officials have praised his remarks on impeachment, and that he isn’t concerned about facing a pro-Trump challenger in the race for his seat. 

"When I go back to my district people are coming up to me and saying, 'Thank you for what you're doing,'" he said during an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union. "People want open, honest representation. They want people to come to Congress and work with integrity."

Amash has also not ruled out launching a presidential bid against Trump in 2020.

"I still wouldn't rule anything like that out. I believe that I have to use my skills, my public influence, where it serves the country best. And I believe I have to defend the Constitution in whichever way works best," he told CNN.

The potential bid has some within the GOP concerned it could hurt the president’s chances of winning key states.

"I worry about the impact that an Amash candidacy has on Michigan. Beyond Michigan, I don't know that Justin would necessarily draw more votes from the Republican side than he would the Democrat side. I mean, remember, Justin's a guy who's been pretty consistently opposed to pro-Israel policy,” Rep. Matt GaetzMatthew (Matt) GaetzState probes of Google, Facebook to test century-old antitrust laws Five takeaways on Trump's ouster of John Bolton GOP lawmakers, states back gunmaker in Sandy Hook appeal MORE (R-Fla.) told The Hill in an interview in June.  

Health care

Democrats are going on offense as ObamaCare faces a lawsuit, backed by the Trump administration, seeking to overturn the entire health care law. 

Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerCharles (Chuck) Ellis SchumerSinema says she would back Kennedy in race against Markey Democrats threaten to withhold defense votes over wall Pelosi: 'People are dying' because McConnell won't bring up gun legislation MORE (D-N.Y.) will hold a press call on Monday to discuss the lawsuit and the larger GOP efforts to dismantle ObamaCare, a key Democratic message during the 2018 elections. 

The House Committee on Oversight and Reform will also hold a hearing Wednesday on the administration’s stance on Texas v. United States, including the decision to back striking down the entire 2010 Affordable Care Act. 

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans will hear arguments on Tuesday on the lawsuit to nix the law, a lawsuit which is backed by the Trump administration. 

Though legal experts say the lawsuit is unlikely to ultimately succeed, the outcome isn’t guaranteed, and Democrats are using it to argue Republicans are a threat to the 20 million people who rely on ObamaCare for health insurance.

Defense authorization

The House is poised to take up a massive defense bill that could allow Democrats to push back on elements of Trump’s defense and foreign policy. 

The $733 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) provides funding and broad policy guidelines for the Pentagon for the 2020 fiscal year, which starts in October. 

The House bill prohibits Pentagon funding from being used on the border wall, makes changes to the emergency authority Trump invoked to dip into Pentagon coffers for the wall and modifies the authority Trump has used to deploy U.S. troops to the border.

House Democrats are also expected to incorporate an amendment that would prevent Trump from taking military action against Iran without congressional approval. The Senate rejected a similar amendment in a 50-40 vote before the July 4th recess. 

Once the House passes its bill it will need to be reconciled with the Senate legislation, which passed that chamber last month. While the Senate’s bill was largely bipartisan, the House Armed Services Committee passed its bill largely along party lines. 

Mueller fallout

The House will dig in further this week into the findings of special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerFox's Cavuto roasts Trump over criticism of network Mueller report fades from political conversation Trump calls for probe of Obama book deal MORE’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election and the Trump campaign. 

The House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on Friday morning entitled “Constitutional Processes for Addressing Presidential Misconduct.” 

Mueller, in his final report, did not reach a conclusion on whether Trump obstructed justice, saying he was precluded from doing so by a Justice Department opinion that says a sitting president cannot be indicted. Instead, he outlined 10 “episodes” of possible obstructive behavior regarding ongoing probes into Russia's election meddling.

The hearing comes as more House Democrats are clamoring for House Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiWords matter, except to Democrats, when it involves impeaching Trump Nadler: Impeachment inquiry a 'made-up term' but it's essentially 'what we are doing' Young insurgents aren't rushing to Kennedy's side in Markey fight MORE (D-Calif.) to start impeachment proceedings against Trump. 

Friday’s hearing will come about a week before Mueller is scheduled to testify before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees on July 17. 

“Pursuant to subpoenas issued by the House Judiciary and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence tonight, Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III has agreed to testify before both Committees on July 17 in open session,” Rep. Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerWords matter, except to Democrats, when it involves impeaching Trump Nadler: Impeachment inquiry a 'made-up term' but it's essentially 'what we are doing' DOJ files brief arguing against House impeachment probe MORE (D-N.Y.), the chairman of the Judiciary panel, and Rep. Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffHouse chairman subpoenas acting Trump intel chief over whistleblower complaint The Hill's Morning Report - Can Trump save GOP in North Carolina special election? Giuliani tears into Democrats after House opens probe into whether he pressured Ukraine to target Biden MORE (D-Calif.), the chairman of the Intelligence panel, said in a joint statement late last week. 

In addition to the Judiciary Committee hearing, the House Appropriations Committee will hold a hearing on efforts to counter Russia’s disinformation and influence efforts. 

Circuit nomination

The Senate will take up another of President Trump’s circuit court nominations, setting up a clash over the Ninth Circuit. 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellSupreme Court comes to Trump's aid on immigration GOP group's ad calls on Graham to push for election security: 'Are you still trying?' Harris keeps up 'little dude' attack on Trump after debate MORE (R-Ky.) set up a cloture vote for Monday evening on Daniel Bress’s nomination to be an appeals judge for the Ninth Circuit, despite opposition from both Sens. Dianne FeinsteinDianne Emiel FeinsteinTrump court pick sparks frustration for refusing to answer questions This week: Congress returns for first time since mass shootings GOP senators object to White House delaying home-state projects for border wall MORE (D-Calif.) and Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisHarris keeps up 'little dude' attack on Trump after debate The crosshairs of extremism  On The Money: Democratic candidates lay into Trump on trade | China exempts US soybeans, pork from tariff hikes | Congress set to ignore Trump's wall request in stopgap measure MORE (D-Calif.).

Republicans have prioritized circuit court picks and have viewed the Ninth Circuit as a perennial annoyance, arguing that it’s too large and too liberal. 

With only a simple majority needed for confirmation and Republicans holding a 53-47 Senate majority, Bress is expected to be confirmed, even though neither Feinstein nor Harris returned their blue slip for him. 

Feinstein and Harris said in a statement last month that Bress was a Washington, D.C., lawyer and not involved in California's legal community. 

“He attended law school and clerked for two federal judges on the East Coast. Apart from being admitted to practice in California, he’s not involved in any of the state’s legal or civic organizations and hasn’t been a member of the California legal community,” the two said in a statement.  

The "blue-slip" rule — a precedent upheld by Senate tradition — has historically allowed a home-state senator to stop a lower-court nominee by refusing to return the blue slip to the Judiciary Committee. How strictly the precedent is upheld is decided by the committee chairman, and enforcement has varied depending on who wields the gavel.

Though Republicans say they will honor blue slips for lower-court district nominees, whose rulings can be overruled by circuit courts, they have moved several circuit nominations over the objection of Democratic home-state senators.