A new bill introduced by Senate Republicans could be the key to getting woke activist judges out of office after their actions have delayed the deportation of illegal immigrants and directly gone against President Trump and the United States Constitution.
For context, the Judicial Relief Clarification Act of 2025, which was announced on March 31, 2025, was signed in an effort led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to ban judges from passing injunctions without a class action. If passed, the act would prevent cases like that of Judge James Boasberg using an injunction to stop the deportation of illegal immigrants to El Salvador.
In a statement published by the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Sen. Grassley introduced the act, explaining that it was a response to “sweeping orders from individual district judges that dictate national policy.” Grassley continued, “Our Founders saw an important role for the judiciary, but the Constitution limits judges to exercising power over ‘cases’ or ‘controversies.’ Judges are not policymakers, and allowing them to assume this role is very dangerous.”
Continuing his statement, Sen. Grassley explained that the act “clarifies the scope of judicial power and resolves illegitimate judicial infringement upon the executive branch.” He added, “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.”
In addition to Sen. Grassley’s effort, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) reportedly introduced a similar piece of legislation, the No Rogue Rulings Act, during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on April 1, 2025. Explaining his act, Rep. Issa said, “These rogue judge rulings are a new resistance to the Trump administration and the only time in which judges in robes, in this number, have felt it necessary to participate in the political process rather than participate in the Article III process.”
Continuing, Rep. Issa argued that “the third branch has the last word,” adding, “We have accepted that for over 200 years.” However, he clarified, “But that acceptance is for the Supreme Court to make the final decision, not one of over 700 district court judges.”
In addition, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the head of the Judiciary Committee, expressed similar concerns about judicial overreach during the April 1 hearing, saying, “Who gets to make the call? Is it the guy whose name is on the ballot, or some bureaucrat? Is it the guy who got 77 million votes, or some district judge?”
"*" indicates required fields
Furthermore, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich also weighed in on the need to push past impeachment during the April 1 hearing, saying, “There is clearly a potential constitutional crisis involving the judicial branch’s effort to fully override the legislative and executive branches.” Gingrich added, “This is, potentially, a judicial coup d’etat.”
Watch coverage of the April 1 Judiciary Committee meeting:
Featured image credit: screengrab from the embedded video