In response to multiple judicial rulings that have slowed or stopped actions by President Donald Trump, the U.S. House — with the support of Republicans from Colorado — attempted to reduce the power of the federal courts last week by passing the No Rogue Rulings Act, which would ban district judges from issuing nationwide injunctions that can, among other things, block Trump’s executive orders.
The proposed law, which passed the House with all Republicans voting “yes” except one, is part of the battle between the three branches of government that is leading scholars to question whether the U.S. is in a constitutional crisis.
Pointing to the rulings by district judges in response to Trump’s orders, U.S. Rep. Gabe Evans (R-CO) said in an interview with Fox News Digital that it’s up to Congress to rein in the power of federal judges, explaining that issuing nationwide injunctions upsets the balance of power among the three branches of government.
“You can go look at the statistics, and you can see how many different rulings that the judges have made around the administration,” Evans said during the April 10 Fox interview, emphasising that power must be appropriately shared by the government. “And so, in this space, you go back and look at the Constitution, Congress does have the authority and the ability to be able to, I guess, set the structure for the judiciary and be able to put guardrails around the judiciary. That’s a constitutional authority that’s given to Congress.”
“And so when we see district judges who are able to make nationwide injunctions, I think that’s absolutely a conversation that we have to have is, does that upset the balance and does that elevate one branch, the judiciary, above the other two separate and co-equal branches of government, when one lone judicial district judge can make a nationwide injunction?” asked Evans. “And so I’m very, very much looking forward to having that conversation and making sure that we’re able to preserve the balance of our three separate co-equal branches of government.”
The U.S. Constitution does not give clear guidance about Congress’s authority over the courts, said Doug Spencer, a professor of law at the University of Colorado Law School in Boulder.
“That debate has essentially been going on for more than 200 years, and in different eras of our country, that balance has been struck in different ways,” Spencer said. “There’s a general acceptance that Congress can have some authority to decide what federal courts can hear.”
The constant back and forth between the courts, Congress, and the executive is not normal in the first 100 days of a presidency, said Elliot Mincberg, senior counsel at People For the American Way, an advocacy group. The No Rogue Rulings Act is included in this.
“There have been periods in the past when you’ve had, usually at the urging of presidents, some efforts by Congress to limit the courts in some ways,” Mincberg said. “So it’s not completely out of the question, but coming as frequently as it is now is a little unusual.”
In a speech to the U.S. House, U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) called the No Rogue Rulings Act a “bold and necessary step to rein in activist judges who have made it their sole mission to obstruct the agenda of President Donald J. Trump.”
She said federal judges were blocking Trump from delivering on his promises to the American people.
“But what have we seen?” asked Boebert. “Unelected judges have issued sweeping nationwide injunctions to stop [Trump] at every turn. … This isn’t justice. It’s Judicial tyranny.”
Colorado’s two other Republican congressmen, Jeff Crank and Jeff Hurd, also voted for the No Rogue Rulings bill.
Some Republicans, like Boebert, are going further, calling for the impeachment of specific judges.
“Opposing any judge that doesn’t vote his [Trump’s] way, even getting to the point that they’ve supported the idea of impeaching some of them,” Mincberg said. “Not all have felt that way, but certainly you’ve seen many Republicans taking that view.”
Boebert cosponsored a resolution to impeach U.S. District Judge James Boasberg for ordering a stop on deportations under the Alien Enemies Act.
“Chief Judge Boasberg, in violation of his oath of office, did knowingly and willfully use his judicial position to advance political gain while interfering with the President’s constitutional prerogatives and enforcement of the rule of law,” reads the resolution.
U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) sponsored the No Rogue Rulings Act so Trump could continue to carry out deportations.
“Practically every day, activist federal judges are abusing their Article III power, contradicting the Constitution and blocking President Donald Trump from exercising his executive authority to deport criminal illegals,” said Issa in a news release.
This battle between House Republicans and the judiciary reflects a current debate among scholars on whether the U.S. is in a constitutional crisis.
Spencer said the Constitution is meant to guide what to do when the three branches of government conflict with one another.
“I think on some issues like these immigration issues, the Trump administration has clearly crossed the line and has put us in a crisis,” Spencer said. “But there are other issues, for example, this injunction, or issues related to voting, where I would say the Trump administration is pushing the boundaries, but may not have crossed that line, and so that’s why you will have disagreement on some issues.”
