House Republicans are eyeing legislation to clamp down on the power of lower federal courts that could be a more viable alternative to launching impeachment inquiries into individual judges.
While President Donald Trump and some of his allies in Congress have backed impeachment for certain judges who have blocked his executive orders, another legislative approach is emerging among House Republicans.
A Republican bill introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) comes after U.S. district judges issued a burst of nationwide orders blocking Trump’s executive actions, leading to an angry GOP. The bill would stop these judges from blocking most of Trump’s policy on a national scale and could hit the floor in early April, Politico reported.
“The president wants this,” top White House aides told people on Capitol Hill, Fox News reported.
Passage of the legislation could change precedent moving forward in district courts. All presidents have received nationwide injunctions in response to policies put out by the administration.
Issa’s legislation, the No Rogue Rulings Act of 2025, would narrow the scope of district court rulings in the future so that a lower court’s decision would not have far-reaching jurisdiction.
Last year, a U.S. district court judge in Louisiana blocked then-President Joe Biden’s pause on liquefied natural gas exports nationwide — beyond the 16 red states that challenged the executive action. Under Issa’s legislation, future district-level rulings could be limited to the parties involved, and could undermine efforts by GOP attorneys general to thwart future Democratic presidents’ executive actions.
The push to rein in district judges comes as Trump has a long history of the judiciary calling him out for overreach. During Trump’s first term alone, his policies had 64 nationwide district court injunctions, according to the Harvard Law Review. In comparison, former President George W. Bush had six total injunctions, former President Barack Obama had 12, and Biden had 14 injunctions to thwart his agenda.
Even more so than his first term, Trump is operating at a record-breaking pace with a flurry of executive orders and tapping into little-used laws, such as the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, to justify his agenda and set up novel cases before the courts.
Since 2016, lower court rulings have become vastly more partisan, with 100% of injunctions against Biden coming from judges appointed by Republican presidents and injunctions against Trump from Democratic-appointed judges sitting at 92.2% during his first term. Fewer than 60% of injunctions against both Bush and Obama came from judges appointed by presidents from the opposing party.
Republicans claim that unelected “activist judges” appointed by Democrats have gotten too much power to stop the president’s policies from launching, while Democrats argue that the Trump administration’s actions are illegal and that injunctions are an appropriate step as the challenges to Trump’s executive orders make their way through the legal system.
One of the latest examples of this was a Maryland judge’s decision ordering the Department of Government Efficiency to stop dismantling the U.S. Agency for International Development, noting that Congress has the power to dismantle agencies it created.
“Activist judges with political agendas pose a significant threat to the rule of law, equal justice, and the separation of powers,” a spokesperson for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) wrote to the Washington Examiner. “The Speaker looks forward to working with the Judiciary Committee as they review all available options under the Constitution to address this urgent matter.”
Trump himself has called for the impeachment of at least one judge who temporarily blocked his immigration plans. Impeachment and removal of a judge would be nearly impossible in this Congress because it would require Democratic support in the Senate, but the White House’s outspokenness about the judiciary has breathed life into judicial reform.
“It takes 5 Supreme Court justices to issue a ruling that affects the whole nation,” posted Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser. “Yet lone District Court judges assume the authority to unilaterally dictate the policies of the entire executive branch of government.”
The chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), supported Issa’s bill after it passed out of committee earlier this month. He has not ruled out impeachment proceedings against certain judges, saying everything is on the table.
Democrats, in the minority in Congress, have defended the judges and view the courts as one avenue they have to push back on Trump’s aggressive, quick-moving agenda. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) recently cited 235 “progressive judges” confirmed under Biden as the one bright spot in stopping Trump.
“Every day, federal judges are upholding their oath of office and defending the Constitution by blocking lawless Executive Orders and Elon Musk’s attacks on the government,” House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) told the Washington Examiner.
Raskin pointed out that the GOP has also relied on the courts, pointing to Republicans turning to one conservative federal judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, in Texas to try to thwart Biden’s agenda, on issues including abortion access and LGBT rights.
“My GOP colleagues are attacking these judges as ‘rogues,’ filing impeachment articles against them and trying to nullify nationwide injunctions, a time-honored judicial mechanism right-wing judges like Matthew Kacsmaryk have been freely using with the support of my colleagues,” Raskin said.
While Democrats push back on Republicans’ attempt to take away power from the lower courts, a GOP senator announced his plan to introduce legislation in the Senate to clamp down on judges, and it is expected to be different than Issa’s bill.
“District Court judges have issued RECORD numbers of national injunctions against the Trump administration – a dramatic abuse of judicial authority,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) wrote on X as he announced his forthcoming legislation.
TOUGH ROAD TO IMPEACHING JUDGES RUNS THROUGH HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
The White House’s support for this bill comes after Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) introduced a resolution earlier this week that would be a tough pill for some in the GOP to swallow, making it unlikely to cross the finish line. The Texas firebrand’s resolution calls to impeach James Boasberg following the U.S. district judge’s decision for a 14-day emergency stop to Trump’s plans to deport suspected Tren de Aragua gang members to El Salvador.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment on Issa’s bill.