In a major move to shield Donald Trump’s agenda from legal roadblocks, House Republicans passed a bill Wednesday that would strip federal judges of the power to block his policies across the country.
The bill, called the No Rogue Rulings Act, was introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and passed by a narrow 219-213 vote. It stops district court judges from issuing nationwide injunctions—orders that pause or block federal actions not just for the people suing, but for everyone in the U.S.
This would dramatically limit the courts’ ability to stop Trump’s controversial policies before they take effect nationwide.
“Since President Trump has returned to office, left-leaning activists have cooperated with ideological judges who they have sought out to take their cases and weaponize nationwide injunctions to stall dozens of lawful executive actions and initiatives,” Issa said. “These sweeping injunctions represent judicial activism at the worst.”
Democrats fired back, saying Trump’s policies keep getting blocked because they’re unlawful—not because judges are overstepping.
“If you don’t like the injunctions, don’t do illegal, unconstitutional stuff. That simple,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.).
The GOP’s push comes after a federal judge temporarily stopped Trump from deporting Venezuelans to a Salvadoran prison—a move made under the Alien Enemies Act. Trump wants that judge impeached. Republicans say it’s wrong for one judge to be able to derail a nationwide policy.
But Democrats argue these broad rulings are essential when policies threaten people everywhere, not just those who can afford to sue.
They point to Trump’s attempt to deny birthright citizenship—an order struck down by judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents. Without nationwide blocks, each parent of every affected child would have to sue individually.
“Nationwide injunctions play an essential role in protecting our democracy and holding the political branches accountable,” Jayapal said. “Without them, millions of people could be harmed by these illegal or unconstitutional government policies.”
The use of these sweeping court orders has surged over the past 25 years. Under George W. Bush, there were six. Obama faced 12. Trump’s first term saw a massive jump to 64.
Now, just weeks into Trump’s second term, the courts have already surpassed the total from all of Biden’s presidency—14.
Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) defended the bill, calling the injunctions a dangerous power grab by judges.
“Judges are asserting this authority by themselves, and it’s an outrageous abuse of public trust and judicial power,” he said. “The Congress is elected to make law. The president is elected to enforce it. The judiciary is appointed for the sole purpose of resolving cases and controversies brought to it by individual injured parties.”
But Democrats warn Trump is already pushing far beyond presidential limits. He’s issued more than 100 executive orders in just a few months—many of them challenged in court.
“Federal judges have issued at least 68 court orders that block or pause the administration’s lawlessness to prevent irreparable harm in the country from his unconstitutional actions,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.). “The judges deciding here were appointed by five different presidents—both Democratic presidents and Republican presidents.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has introduced a matching bill in the Senate, but it’s unclear when it will move forward.
