Jim Jordan Says District Courts Have Overstepped Their Authority
House Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Jim Jordan is taking aim at activist judges who have repeatedly obstructed President Donald Trump’s lawful efforts to enforce immigration laws, secure the border, and implement key America First policies.
Appearing on Newsmax’s Rob Schmitt Tonight on Monday, the Ohio Republican laid out the case for legislative reform to curb the growing abuse of nationwide injunctions issued by single federal district judges.
“We passed the legislation that said one of these federal district judges who issues an injunction, the injunction shouldn’t apply nationwide,” Jordan explained. “It should apply to the parties in that case in that jurisdiction, not to the entire country.”
The bill in question—the No Rogue Judges Act—cleared the House on April 9 in a narrow 219–213 vote. If passed by the Senate and signed into law by President Trump, it would bar district court judges from issuing broad injunctions that extend beyond the immediate parties involved in a case, except in narrowly defined scenarios.
“This is about fundamental fairness,” Jordan said, noting that the Constitution never intended for a single unelected judge to unilaterally block national policy.
Jordan pointed out that even Chief Justice John Roberts has acknowledged the issue, recently emphasizing the proper use of appellate courts to resolve disagreements.
“Justice Roberts put out a statement a month or so ago about, you know, the proper course of action is if you don’t like the decision of a district judge, is to, you know, use the appellate courts,” Jordan said. “And I get all that. But I think his statement just sort of underscores the focus that’s now on this issue.”
“I do think some of these cases are going to get to the Supreme Court in a pretty quick manner,” he added, indicating that the problem has reached a breaking point.
Jordan remains hopeful that the Senate will act and give President Trump the opportunity to restore balance to the judiciary.
“We think there’s a chance that that bill hopefully could get through the Senate and get signed by President Trump and scale some of this back, some of the power that these district judges have currently,” he said.
Beyond the standalone legislation, House Republicans are also embedding reforms in the broader federal budget. A key provision—Section 70303—was quietly included in the Judiciary Committee’s portion of the fiscal year 2025 budget resolution. The section would limit the ability of federal judges to enforce contempt citations against government officials unless plaintiffs post a monetary bond—a procedural hurdle rarely applied in lawsuits aimed at halting executive actions.
Critics argue that this would weaken judicial authority. But a Judiciary Committee aide defended the move, saying the provision is intended “basically to stop frivolous lawsuits.”
Democrats and media allies have complained that this would undermine the judiciary. But conservatives see it as a necessary pushback against lawfare tactics that have become routine tools to obstruct the Trump administration from executing its constitutional duties.
Two Democrat-appointed judges—James E. Boasberg of the D.C. District Court and Paula Xinis of Maryland—have indicated they may hold administration officials in contempt in immigration-related cases. These threats have only intensified calls among conservatives to hold rogue judges accountable.
Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) has already introduced articles of impeachment against Judge Boasberg for blocking deportation flights conducted under the Alien Enemies Act—an established legal authority that gives the executive branch broad discretion in matters of national security and immigration enforcement.
“For the past several weeks, we’ve seen several rogue activist judges try to impede the president from exercising, not only the mandate voters gave him, but his democratic and constitutional authority to keep the American people safe,” Gill told Fox News Digital. “This is another example of a rogue judge overstepping his…authority.”
The Constitution is clear: the Executive Branch executes the laws. Yet for years, activist judges have acted as unelected policymakers—halting deportations, blocking executive orders, and dictating national immigration policy from the bench.
Now, under President Donald Trump’s leadership and with Rep. Jordan at the helm of the Judiciary Committee, conservatives are fighting to restore constitutional order, prevent judicial overreach, and ensure that no single judge can substitute their political agenda for the will of the people.