Through legislative and other means, the president’s allies are preparing to deal with judicial overreach.
Congressional Republicans, perhaps many of them concerned about their modest majorities in the House and Senate if they don’t deliver on the Trump agenda before the midterm elections, are ready to take on the judges. Restraining orders and other types of injunctions, tying the hands of President Donald Trump’s administration, have been coming in thick and fast from federal judges across the country. Frustrated GOPers are now exploring various options for putting a stop to what increasingly appears to be a politically motivated sabotage operation being conducted through select courts and with the aid of complicit judges.
Since Trump began his second term, almost every action at the executive branch level has been met with an injunction of one form or another. At least a dozen such legal rulings have stymied the president’s plans. Several of the federal judges issuing these injunctions have been revealed to be Democratic Party donors, many with associations or family connections to various progressive special interests. The idea, then, that their decisions are based purely on law and have nothing to do with politics – according to some GOP lawmakers – is hard to swallow.
Backlash to Federal Judges Growing
An effort to impeach US District Court Judge James Boasberg is reportedly gaining momentum on Capitol Hill, even as Republican leaders hesitate. Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order to prevent the administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport illegal aliens. The likelihood of Boasberg or any of the other “activist” federal judges being convicted and removed from office in a Senate impeachment trial is more than unlikely. Such a course of action, then, might be seen as almost petty and would amount to little more than a slap on the wrist.
A couple of legislative moves aimed at curtailing the judges’ ability to, essentially, dictate executive branch policy are underway in both chambers of Congress. In the Senate, Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is pushing a bill titled the Judicial Relief Clarification Act of 2025, which would allow injunctions to be immediately appealed.
Grassley expressed one of the main concerns with the deluge of legal obstacles. “For a number of years, but particularly in the last few months, we’ve increasingly seen sweeping orders from individual district judges that dictate national policy,” the senator asserted in a statement. He elaborated:
“Judges are not policymakers, and allowing them to assume this role is very dangerous. The Judicial Relief Clarification Act clarifies the scope of judicial power and resolves illegitimate judicial infringement upon the executive branch. It’s a commonsense bill that’s needed to provide long-term constitutional clarity and curb district courts’ growing tendency to overstep by issuing sweeping, nationwide orders.”
Indeed, as Just the News reported, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan – appointed by President Barack Obama – was herself concerned by this judicial (or perhaps extrajudicial) trend. Speaking at Northwestern University Law School in 2022, Kagan said, “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 it takes to go through the normal process.”
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) has a more ambitious idea. It is generally understood that federal judges are appointed to lifetime terms, but Biggs notes that the Constitution does not grant lifetime tenure. Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution states, “The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour,” and so there appears to be no barrier in the founding document to ousting a judge for “failing to maintain the standard of good behavior required of judges.” That quote is from the resolution the congressman has filed to remove Boasberg from office.
The bigger picture is a disregard for the democratic process. It is, to say the least, ironic that the people who constantly claim Trump is a threat to democracy are now using politically friendly judges to override the will of the people. American voters knew very well what Trump had planned for the country. They elected him and, according to the polls, remain supportive of the very actions these federal judges are blocking. It’s almost as if Democrats and progressive activist groups pursuing legal action to obstruct the Trump agenda have decided that election outcomes can and should be negated if their preferred policies are not being enacted.
Dig Deeper Into the Themes Discussed in this Article!
Liberty Vault: The Constitution of the United States
Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.
