The judicial branch is in chaos. There are countless challenges to Trump’s authority in the courts.
But Congress just said enough is enough with this game-changing bill that puts the courts on notice.
Reining in Rogue Judges: House Passes Bill to Protect Trump’s Pro-America Agenda
The House of Representatives passed the No Rogue Rulings Act on Wednesday, a bill designed to curb the overreach of federal district judges issuing nationwide injunctions. Spearheaded by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., this legislation marks a critical step toward ensuring that the will of the American people, as expressed through their votes for President Donald Trump, is not derailed by activist judges wielding unchecked power.
The No Rogue Rulings Act, which passed with a vote of 219 to 213, restricts district courts from issuing sweeping, U.S.-wide injunctions that halt Trump’s policies across the nation. Instead, courts will now be required to limit their rulings to the specific parties involved in a case. This change addresses a growing concern among Republicans that a handful of judges have been able to single-handedly block transformative reforms, from immigration enforcement to dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
The vote saw near-unanimous support from Republicans, with all but one GOP lawmaker backing the measure. Democrats, however, uniformly opposed it, signaling their reluctance to relinquish the judicial leverage they’ve relied on to obstruct Trump’s agenda. The partisan divide underscores the stakes of this legislation, which seeks to restore balance to a judiciary that many conservatives view as increasingly politicized.
Since Trump took office, his administration has faced a barrage of over 15 nationwide injunctions targeting key policies. These include efforts to reform birthright citizenship and roll back DEI frameworks that critics argue prioritize ideology over merit. Each injunction has delayed or derailed initiatives that resonate with the millions of Americans who supported Trump’s vision for a stronger, more secure nation.
Rep. Issa, the bill’s champion, expressed confidence in its passage well before the vote. “We’ve got the votes,” he told Fox News Digital on Tuesday morning. His optimism proved well-founded, as Republicans rallied behind the measure with remarkable unity. Issa’s leadership on this issue reflects a broader GOP commitment to protecting the mandate delivered by voters in the last election.
While Issa hoped for bipartisan support, he acknowledged the challenge of persuading Democrats. “We’re hoping some people look at it on its merits rather than its politics,” he said. Interestingly, even former Biden administration solicitor general Elizabeth Prelogar had voiced concerns about the misuse of district judges’ powers, suggesting that the issue of judicial overreach transcends party lines—at least in principle.
Another key figure in the bill’s success was Rep. Derek Schmidt, R-Kan., whose amendment tackled the practice of “judge shopping,” where plaintiffs strategically file cases in districts with sympathetic judges. Schmidt described the legislation as a rare example of true common sense. “A lot of things get called commonsense around here, but this one genuinely is,” he told Fox News Digital before the vote. His amendment strengthens the bill by ensuring that legal challenges to Trump’s policies face a fairer, less manipulated judicial process.
Schmidt also pointed out that limiting nationwide injunctions has historically enjoyed bipartisan support. “The basic policy of trying to rein in the overuse of nationwide injunctions was supported by Democrats before. It’s supported by Republicans now, and I’m hoping [this vote will] be supported by both,” he said. While Democrats ultimately rejected the bill, Schmidt’s remarks remind us that the principle of judicial restraint was once a shared value.
Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, celebrated the bill’s passage as a victory for fairness. “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,” he told Fox News Digital. Gooden’s blunt assessment resonates with conservatives who see the judiciary as a battleground in the fight to implement Trump’s America-first policies.
Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, echoed Gooden’s sentiments, emphasizing the democratic mandate behind the legislation. “More than 77 million Americans voted for [Trump’s] pro-American policies and want to see them implemented quickly. There is no reason that activist judges whose authority does not extend nationally should be allowed to completely stop [his] agenda,” Feenstra told Fox News Digital. His words capture the frustration of millions who feel their votes are being undermined by unelected judges.
The GOP’s unity on this issue is particularly striking given earlier disagreements over how to address judicial activism. Some conservatives, like Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., initially pushed for the impeachment of specific judges who blocked Trump’s policies. Stutzman, a supporter of both impeachment and Issa’s bill, didn’t mince words about the stakes. “The judicial vendetta against President Trump’s agenda needs to be checked. Nationwide injunctions by activists judges have stood in the way of the American people’s will and in come cases their safety, since the President was sworn into office,” he told Fox News Digital.
Stutzman praised Issa’s bill as a practical solution, stating, “It will stop individual judge’s political beliefs from preventing the wants and needs of our citizens from being implemented.” His comments reflect a growing consensus among Republicans that legislative action, rather than symbolic gestures like impeachment, offers the most effective path forward.
While some conservatives had advocated for impeaching judges, House GOP leaders wisely steered the party toward Issa’s bill, viewing it as a more achievable and enduring solution. This strategic choice paid off with the bill’s passage, demonstrating the party’s ability to unite behind a common goal. The focus now shifts to the Senate, where the legislation faces a tougher road due to the chamber’s 60-vote threshold. Convincing even a handful of Democrats to support the bill will be an uphill battle, but Republicans remain hopeful that the merits of judicial reform will resonate across the aisle.
The No Rogue Rulings Act represents more than just a procedural tweak—it’s a defense of the Trump administration’s right to govern without constant judicial interference. By limiting the scope of district court rulings, the bill ensures that the voices of millions of Americans who backed Trump’s vision are not silenced by a single judge’s gavel. As the fight moves to the Senate, the nation watches to see whether this critical reform will become law, paving the way for a presidency unhindered by rogue rulings.
The Conservative Column will update you on any further developments on this bill.
