House GOP passes bill to put a choke chain on rogue anti-Trump judges

House Republicans passed a bill to limit the ability of rogue federal judges from issuing nationwide restraining orders and injunctions, the left’s new strategy to thwart the reform agenda of President Donald J. Trump.

On Wednesday, the No Rogue Rulings Act passed by a vote of 219-213 with all Democrats opposing reining in the abuse of the judicial system by lower court judges who have shown that they are little more than activists in robes.

BREAKING: HR 1526 passes the U.S. House to limit district court judges’ authority to issue orders blocking presidential policies nationwide – reining in activist judges pic.twitter.com/yqG3K8LSkl

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) April 9, 2025

“Since Trump took office, activist judges in district courts have aggressively blocked his executive actions, issuing nationwide injunctions at an unprecedented rate. In fact, in just the first nine weeks of his presidency, district courts issued more nationwide injunctions than in all four years of Joe Biden’s presidency and all eight years of Barack Obama’s term,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and August Pfluger (R-TX) wrote in a column for Fox News.

The bill bars the lower courts from issuing nationwide injunctions, instead limiting them to a focus on the actual parties involved in a case and not the entire country.

“Since President Trump has returned to office, left-leaning activists have cooperated with ideological judges whom they have sought out to take their cases and weaponize nationwide injunctions to stall dozens of lawful executive actions and initiatives,” said Issa, who sponsored the legislation.

“These sweeping injunctions represent judicial activism at the worst,” he added.

“Many Democrat-appointed lower court judges have conducted themselves like activist liberal lawyers in robes while attempting to stop President Trump’s nationwide reforms. The No Rogue Rulings Act limits this unchecked power,” House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Lance Gooden (R-TX) told Fox News Digital.

“The judicial vendetta against President Trump’s agenda needs to be checked. Nationwide injunctions by activist judges have stood in the way of the American people’s will and in some cases their safety, since the President was sworn into office,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN) told the outlet.

The bill faces an uncertain future in the Senate, where Democrats will almost certainly filibuster it, a procedure that they have come to love after failing to abolish it during the Biden years.

“This isn’t a partisan question. If we want presidents to obey the law, courts need to be able to stop them when they’re overstepping. The Senate needs to reject this bill,” the ACLU said, urging Senate lawmakers to kill the bill.

The once-venerable civil liberties organization shamelessly used the nationwide injunction against former President Joe Biden’s COVID vaccine mandate as an example of why such judicial powers are necessary, but only underscored how frivolously they are now being used by Democrat-appointed judges since Trump took office.

Democrats rejected the idea that their judges were engaging in improper conduct, falling back on the usual tiresome bashing of Trump.

“If it seems like an incredible number of cases to lose in less than 100 days, recall that Trump is engaged in a record number of illegal actions at a breathtaking velocity never seen before in U.S. history,”  Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), a radical former college professor and leader of the congressional resistance, asserted.

“My colleagues on the other side of the aisle want you to believe that somehow these nationwide injunctions being issued by courts across the country against Donald Trump’s illegal and unconstitutional actions are unfair,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), an Israel hating progressive and Hamas rape apologist.

“Here’s the message: If you don’t like the injunctions, don’t do illegal, unconstitutional stuff. That simple,” she added.

“In 2025, unelected district judges have overstepped their bounds, inserting themselves into cases where they lack standing or subject matter expertise. Even more concerning, their rulings have had serious consequences for national security, including Judge Boasberg’s attempt to delay the deportation of dangerous gang members. For the party that claims to be the defender of democracy, the fact that an unelected lower court judge can micromanage the commander-in-chief should trouble every single American,” Issa and Pfluger wrote.