Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
FIRST ON FOX: President Trump is showing significant interest in a House Republican bill designed to prevent federal judges from issuing nationwide injunctions, sources familiar with the discussions told Fox News Digital.
This week, top aides within the White House communicated to senior staff on Capitol Hill that the president is eager for Congress to act on this legislation swiftly. The urgency reflects the administration’s belief that immediate action is crucial.
The move comes amid frustration with U.S. district court judges, who have issued over a dozen nationwide orders temporarily halting various executive actions taken by Trump.
Proposed Legislation to Restrict Judicial Authority
The bill, spearheaded by Rep. Darrell Issa, would seek to restrict judges from blocking Trump’s policies on a national level if it clears Congress and receives presidential approval. If enacted, it would significantly alter the landscape of how federal judiciary power interacts with the executive branch.
Fox News Digital contacted Issa’s office for further details, but there was no response by the time of publication.
In a related development, a White House official mentioned that they would refrain from commenting on legislative details before the president weighs in. Nevertheless, the proposal appears to be gaining traction within the upper echelons of the White House.
Judges’ Power Under Scrutiny
On social media platform X, Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller, expressed dissatisfaction with federal judges being able to impose nationwide restrictions, although he did not directly reference Issa’s proposed legislation.
Miller wrote, “It takes five Supreme Court justices to issue a ruling affecting the entire nation. Yet, individual district court judges seem to assume the authority to unilaterally dictate policies for the whole executive branch,” highlighting a core grievance against the judiciary’s influence.
He elaborated further, questioning the constitutional basis for a single district judge exercising equivalent authority to a President elected by the nation to lead the executive branch. This argument reflects a broader concern among Trump’s allies about what they term judicial overreach.
Details of the Proposed Bill
Issa’s draft legislation stipulates that, except in specific circumstances, U.S. district courts would be prohibited from granting orders providing for injunctive relief on a nationwide basis. Such an order would only apply to the parties directly involved in the case before that district court.
The bill successfully passed through the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month, with R-Ohio Chairman Jim Jordan expressing support for its progression. He stated on CNN, “We believe it’s a positive move. We have successfully advanced it through committee and aim to proceed with a floor vote in the House soon.”
Support and Opposition Among Republicans
Jordan previously told Fox News Digital that he finds Issa’s proposal to be sensible and that the committee would prioritize its advancement. However, debates continue among Congressional Republicans about the best approach to address what many view as rampant activist judicial behavior.
In a related scenario, Rep. Brandon Gill from Texas recently introduced a resolution to impeach U.S. District Judge James Boasberg after he placed a temporary halt on Trump’s plans regarding the deportation of suspected Tren De Aragua gang members to El Salvador.
Gill claims that Boasberg overstepped his authority, and this week, he expressed hope that the impeachment resolution would progress through the standard committee process, suggesting that Jordan is amenable to holding hearings on this matter.
Trump’s Stance on Judiciary Actions
Trump himself expressed a desire for Boasberg’s impeachment via Truth Social earlier this week, aligning with Gill’s efforts and voicing his frustrations regarding judicial interventions in executive actions.
Despite emergent enthusiasm for impeachment among some Republicans, numerous sources have conveyed that House GOP leaders remain cautious about pursuing that route. They are acutely aware that securing sufficient Democratic support for impeachment in the Senate is virtually impossible.
As one senior House GOP aide noted, “It’s yet another intensive process for an endeavor that will not advance at all in the Senate. I believe the White House is searching for alternative routes that would be more viable.”
Exploring Viable Alternatives
Speaker Mike Johnson’s office confirmed they are examining all potential strategies moving forward. When approached for comment, a spokesperson declared, “Activist judges with political agendas represent a significant threat to the rule of law, equal justice, and the separation of powers. The Speaker is committed to collaborating with the Judiciary Committee to explore all available constitutional options to tackle this urgent issue.”
Fox News Digital also reached out to the Senate Judiciary Committee to determine if they will consider Issa’s legislation, but no feedback was available by the time of reporting.
Fox News Digital’s Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report
