April 08, 2025
What Can Be Done About Rogue Judges?
Timothy Birdnow
So what CAN be done about rogue judges? Rachel Alexander gives a rundown of some of the things that could be implemented to rein in this out-of-control judiciary.
What Can be Done About the Corrupt Progressive Judges Destroying the Rule of Law?
FTA:
All fair ideas. We clearly need some major reform to our current system, which gives almost unlimited power to the courts. The Founding Fathers never intended this, and many of them warned against it in the Anti-Federalist papers.
So what CAN be done about rogue judges? Rachel Alexander gives a rundown of some of the things that could be implemented to rein in this out-of-control judiciary.
What Can be Done About the Corrupt Progressive Judges Destroying the Rule of Law?
FTA:
"One intriguing idea flouted by some members of Congress is to limit federal district court judges from issuing nationwide injunctions. California Rep. Darrell Issa sponsored the The No Rogue Rulings Act of 2025, and Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley sponsored the Nationwide Injunction Abuse Prevent Act of 2025. Both would limit injunctions to that judge’s jurisdiction, not nationwide. Supported by House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana, Issa’s bill is expected to be brought up for a full House vote this week. Issa said, "You know, we don't need a Supreme Court if 700 judges can each do what the Supreme Court does."
Others have talked about having appeals courts hear appeals from rogue judges immediately.
Another fascinating idea, suggested by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, would be for Congress to strip judges of jurisdiction over certain issues such as immigration and executive orders. Political commentator and Fox News host Mark Levin has cited historical precedent for this, such as President Thomas Jefferson’s repeal of the Judiciary Act of 1801.
There is an option being floated for Congress to use appropriations power to defund the lower courts. However, Berkeley constitutional law professor John Yoo argues this would have limited impact and face constitutional challenges.
Democrats proposed their own legislation in 2023 to cut down on one particular abuse, judge shopping. U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and U.S. Representative Deborah Ross, D-N.C. co-sponsored the Fair Courts Act, which prohibits a district court from granting nationwide relief unless the request is heard by a panel of three judges, and requires random assignment of judges. Currently, many courts claim the assignments are random, but they’re really not, the presiding judge is usually in charge of divvying up cases, or has delegated that to the chief clerk. However, the bill doesn’t stop lawsuits from being filed in unlikely jurisdictions, so challenges could still be filed in California or Washington state, for example.
Others have talked about having appeals courts hear appeals from rogue judges immediately.
Another fascinating idea, suggested by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, would be for Congress to strip judges of jurisdiction over certain issues such as immigration and executive orders. Political commentator and Fox News host Mark Levin has cited historical precedent for this, such as President Thomas Jefferson’s repeal of the Judiciary Act of 1801.
There is an option being floated for Congress to use appropriations power to defund the lower courts. However, Berkeley constitutional law professor John Yoo argues this would have limited impact and face constitutional challenges.
Democrats proposed their own legislation in 2023 to cut down on one particular abuse, judge shopping. U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and U.S. Representative Deborah Ross, D-N.C. co-sponsored the Fair Courts Act, which prohibits a district court from granting nationwide relief unless the request is heard by a panel of three judges, and requires random assignment of judges. Currently, many courts claim the assignments are random, but they’re really not, the presiding judge is usually in charge of divvying up cases, or has delegated that to the chief clerk. However, the bill doesn’t stop lawsuits from being filed in unlikely jurisdictions, so challenges could still be filed in California or Washington state, for example.
All fair ideas. We clearly need some major reform to our current system, which gives almost unlimited power to the courts. The Founding Fathers never intended this, and many of them warned against it in the Anti-Federalist papers.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
06:48 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 405 words, total size 3 kb.
22kb generated in CPU 0.0431, elapsed 0.586 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.5805 seconds, 169 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 0.5805 seconds, 169 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
