House Republicans are set to vote on limiting federal judges’ power to issue nationwide injunctions that have repeatedly blocked President Trump’s policy agenda, while one lawmaker calls for the impeachment of a judge who halted deportations.
Quick Takes
- The “No Rogue Rulings Act” would restrict district courts from issuing broad injunctions that impact Trump’s policies nationwide
- Rep. Darrell Issa introduced the bill with support from House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan and Majority Leader Steve Scalise
- Judge James Boasberg has become a focal point after blocking deportations of alleged Tren de Aragua gang members
- Trump’s administration has faced significantly more nationwide injunctions than previous administrations
- Some Republicans have called for Judge Boasberg’s impeachment, though such efforts face significant hurdles
Legislation to Curtail Judicial Overreach
House Republicans are moving forward with legislation designed to limit what they view as judicial overreach by federal district judges. The “No Rogue Rulings Act,” introduced by Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), would restrict district courts from issuing nationwide injunctions, instead limiting the scope of judicial relief to the parties directly involved in the case. The bill has already cleared the House Judiciary Committee and is scheduled for a floor vote next week, according to an announcement from House Majority Leader Steve Scalise.
“Time and again, solitary judges have usurped congressional intent and confronted President Trump, rather than dispassionately interpreted the law,” said Rep. Issa. A companion bill has been introduced in the Senate by Josh Hawley (R-MO), who described the legislation as intended “to STOP liberal judges’ serial abuse of their power by BANNING nationwide injunctions.”
🚨 NEWS → Next week the House plans to vote on @repdarrellissa's No Rogue Rulings Act to limit the judicial overreach of partisan federal judges issuing political nationwide injunctions to impede President Trump's agenda the majority of American voters elected him to carry out.
— Steve Scalise (@SteveScalise) March 24, 2025
Judge Boasberg at the Center of Controversy
U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg has become a particular target of Republican frustration after blocking the Trump administration’s deportation of alleged members of the notorious Tren de Aragua gang to Central America. Boasberg rejected the administration’s petition to lift his restraining order on deportations to El Salvador and required individual judicial reviews for Venezuelans declared “alien enemies” before they could be deported. The judge’s actions have stalled a key component of Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda.
“When you look at Judge Boasberg, it starts to look like this is getting totally political from this guy,” said House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan. Jordan has argued that the administration’s deportation orders are legally justified and has criticized what he perceives as politically motivated judicial interference. Boasberg’s order currently halts deportation flights as he considers a challenge from five Venezuelans represented by the ACLU.
Calls for Impeachment Meet Resistance
Some Republicans have gone further than supporting legislative remedies. Representative Brandon Gill has introduced legislation to impeach Judge Boasberg, though such efforts face significant challenges due to the narrow Republican majority in the House and opposition from key figures. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has publicly rebuked the idea of impeaching judges over disagreements with their rulings, signaling institutional resistance to such a move.
The vote on the No Rogue Rulings Act is partly positioned as an alternative to impeachment efforts. House Speaker Mike Johnson and Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan have indicated they plan to address judicial overreach through hearings and legislative action. Johnson stated that his conference was “working overtime to limit the abuses of activist federal judges” and planned for the Judiciary Committee to “expose the worst offenders.”
Pattern of Injunctions Against Trump’s Policies
According to Republican lawmakers, the Trump administration has faced an unprecedented number of nationwide injunctions from federal judges compared to previous administrations. These have included challenges to Trump’s executive orders on birthright citizenship, deportation efforts, and other immigration enforcement actions. The administration has appealed several of these injunctions to the Supreme Court, including the recent challenge to Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship.
While Republicans frame the legislation as necessary to prevent judicial overreach, Democrats have characterized these measures as attempts to insulate the administration from legitimate legal scrutiny. The debate highlights fundamental tensions in the separation of powers and the role of the judiciary in reviewing executive actions.
