Republicans continue push to end nationwide injunctions by district courts

Republicans are continuing their push to stop nationwide injunctions with a new bill that would limit court orders, including injunctions and temporary restraining orders to parties that are directly before the court

Republicans contend that individual judges are overstepping their authority by blocking President Trump's agenda nationwide

Senator Ashley Moody stated this clear overreach was never envisioned by the framers of the Constitution

This important legislation will be a tool to help stop the unreasonable restraints on executive authority

There are more than 90 district courts in the U.S. with 677 judges

Geographically, each district covers at most a single state, oftentimes just a region within a state

One judge in one district has the authority to implement what's called a universal injunction

which halts executive action across the country while the case works its way through the court system

Senator Chuck Grassley stated, The Constitution limits judges to exercising power over cases or controversies

Judges are not policymakers and allowing them to assume this role is very dangerous

The Congressional Research Service identified 17 nationwide injunctions issued in the first two months of the Trump administration

To put that into perspective the Department of Justice identified 12 nationwide injunctions during George W Bush presidency and 19 during Barack Obama Democrats and Republicans politicians and judges have all spoken out against nationwide injunctions

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, a liberal member of the court, once stated

it just can't be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks

and leave it stopped for the years that it takes to go through the normal process

There's an argument that we should look at how injunctions from a single district court have applied nationwide, but it ought to be above politics

It should not be motivated by particular rulings. And so far, the system seems to have worked pretty well

This bill has a greater chance of being approved than other measures introduced by Republicans that are considered more extreme

like impeaching judges who rule against the president or lowering the funding levels for certain courts

I'm not going to support reducing the federal judiciary's budget because someone doesn't agree with their opinions

That's not the right way. That's not the way we do it in America

The sponsors of the nationwide injunction bill say the Supreme Court has the authority to tell lower courts to stop nationwide injunctions

They also say Article 3 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to set limits on judicial authority

I'm Ray Bogan for Straight Arrow News. For more reporting, download the SAN app