Congressional Republicans Seek Legislation to Limit Judges’ Nationwide Injunctions
WASHINGTON — The U.S. House is scheduled to vote next week on a bill that would limit the authority of federal courts to issue nationwide injunctions against Trump administration policy actions.
The bill, introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., is another sign of the growing conflict between President Donald Trump and federal courts.
Federal judges have issued 15 nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration since Jan. 20. They have sought to halt mass firings of federal employees, prevent elimination of environmental regulations and create procedural requirements before deportations.
The injunctions were responses to President Donald Trump’s executive orders.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., suggested Tuesday that Congress should consider getting rid of some federal courts or at least restricting their ability to rule on issues.
“We do have the authority over the federal courts, as you know,” Johnson said while speaking with the news media. “We can eliminate an entire district court. We have power of funding over the courts and all these other things.”
Johnson is one of the lawmakers who has called for impeaching federal judges the Trump administration considers obstructive.
“But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act,” Johnson said.
Congress has instituted impeachment proceedings against 15 federal judges in American history but only eight have been removed from office. Removal requires evidence of serious crimes or corruption.
Impeachment threats against judges prompted a warning from the Supreme Court’s chief justice.
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Chief Justice John Roberts said in a statement.
He added that the “normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
Issa’s bill, titled the No Rogue Rulings Act, seeks to sidestep conflicts over policy issues by restricting federal judges to issuing injunctions only on behalf of persons who file lawsuits. It would not allow them to intervene in any political issues that extend beyond the persons who sue.
Issa used the word “rogue” in his bill to refer to some federal judges, most specifically U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg, who issued an order this month to stop deportations of accused Venezuelan gang members to a prison in El Salvador.
Boasberg’s contention that deportations occurring before hearings violate constitutional due process rights set off harsh criticisms from Trump and Republicans in Congress.
One of them was Issa, who said in a statement that Boasberg “severely overstepped his authority and demonstrated the most critical shortfall of judicial temperament.”
He called Boasberg’s order for an airplane carrying deportees to return to the United States — which Trump ignored — an example of “Trump resistance in robes.”
A similar bill introduced by Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., is pending in the Senate. The Senate Judiciary Committee plans to hold a hearing on judges’ nationwide injunctions within days.
Democrats say Republicans are creating a constitutional crisis over the balance of governmental power between the president, Congress and the judiciary.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the House Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, said, “Threatening judges with impeachment or retribution for upholding their oaths of office and doing their jobs under the Constitution is an act of outlaw tyranny, not constitutional government.”
You can reach us at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and X
