Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.
Read more
The House of Representatives passed a bill that would limit the ability of federal judges to issue national rulings in lower court cases, as Donald Trump and his allies have raged against judges for temporarily blocking key parts of the president’s agenda.
The No Rogue Rulings Act, which passed on Wednesday 219-to-213 with just one Republican joining Democrats in the opposition, would limit federal district judges from issuing nationwide injunctions, instead restricting them in most cases to rulings that only affect the parties before them.
“In recent years, it has become glaringly obvious that federal judges are overstepping their constitutional bounds,” the bill’s sponsor, Republican Representative Darrell Issa of California, said during floor debate. “This is not a partisan issue. It may be a timely issue for this president, but that does not make it partisan.”
Democrats, for their part, argued the spike in injunctions under the second Trump term wasn’t an issue with the courts, but rather the president’s boundary-pushing actions.
“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,” Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland said of the bill.
The bill is unlikely to pass the Senate, where it would need Democratic support to advance.
Trump has long personally attacked judges and law enforcement officials with whom he disagrees, and the criticisms have reached a fever pitch since he returned to office.
The president has reserved special ire for Judge James Boasberg, who is presiding over a case regarding the administration’s emergency deportations to an El Salvador prison. Trump has called Boasberg a “Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge” and called for his impeachment, prompting a rare public statement from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” he wrote last month. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
White House advisor Elon Musk has sounded a similar tone, claiming judges are leading a “judicial coup” against the administration and reportedly donating to congressional Republicans who have pushed to impeach judges who ruled against Trump.
He also offered Wisconsin voters the chance to win $1 million checks for backing a petition against “activist judges,” in the context of the state’s recent Supreme Court race.
In addition to attacking judges, the administration has been accused of ignoring their rulings.
More than 200 alleged Venezuelan gang members were sent to a notorious Salvadoran prison, despite a court order asking the administration to turn the flights around.
The administration has also admitted to accidentally deporting a Salvadoran man to the same facility, despite knowing of a court order barring his removal to that country, an error the administration has since argued it has no power to correct.
