“House Republicans want to make it harder for federal courts to serve as a check on Trump’s lawlessness and overreach,” said one advocate. “But that’s not how our democracy works.”

With the Trump administration’s attacks on the First Amendment, birthright citizenship, and other constitutional rights in full swing, Republicans in the U.S. House on Wednesday passed a bill that one advocacy group called a “sneak attack” on another bedrock principle of U.S. democracy.

“The passage of the No Rogue Rulings Act (NORRA) is an ideological attack on the checks and balances of our Constitution,” said Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters.

The bill, which passed 219-213, with only Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) joining Democrats in opposing it, would limit U.S. District Court judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions blocking President Donald Trump’s executive orders.

The legislation was proposed by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) after federal judges blocked several actions by Trump, including his executive order aiming to end birthright citizenship, his mass expulsion of immigrants to El Salvador’s prison system, his freeze on federal grants and loans, and the so-called Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) mass firings of federal employees.

NORRA “brings us one step closer to dismantling our democracy for the benefit of one man and his extreme agenda that is actively harming people across the country,” said Maggie Jo Buchanan, interim executive director of the judicial reform group Demand Justice. “Anyone who voted in favor of this bill failed them and our country today.”

“Passage of this bill by the U.S. House is an overreach on the part of the legislative branch, and we urge the U.S. Senate to reject this legislation when it comes to the floor.”

Members of the judiciary including Judges James Boasberg, Paul A. Engelmayer, and John Batestes have faced calls for impeachment over their respective rulings blocking Trump from sending planeloads of immigrants to El Salvador, barring DOGE from accessing the Treasury Department’s payment system, and directing federal health agencies to restore public health data to their websites after Trump ordered them to delete it.

With impeachment votes unlikely to succeed, Stewart said the legislation proposed by Issa “is a political attempt to restrain and block our federal courts from their constitutional responsibility.”

“Judges appointed to the federal bench are independent bodies that review executive and legislative actions to determine their constitutionality. This is a simple process that has been in place for centuries,” said Stewart.

“The League believes that all powers of the U.S. government should be exercised within the constitutional framework to protect the balance among the three branches of government,” she added. “Passage of this bill by the U.S. House is an overreach on the part of the legislative branch, and we urge the U.S. Senate to reject this legislation when it comes to the floor.”

Christina Harvey, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, suggested that in their attacks on federal judges, Republicans are trying to weaken “the first line of defense against Donald Trump’s attempts to cut essential services and attack our freedoms.”

“In response to legal rulings that haven’t gone Trump’s way, House Republicans want to make it harder for federal courts to serve as a check on Trump’s lawlessness and overreach,” said Harvey. “But that’s not how our democracy works. Trump is a president bound by the checks and balances of our Constitution, not a king with unlimited power.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) pointed to the landmark Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education to highlight the irrationality of Republicans’ attempt to bar judges from applying their rulings to the entire nation.

“A nationwide injunction is a necessary part of the judicial tool kit,” Raskin told NBC News. “Why should every person affected [by an issue] have to go to court? Why should millions of people have to create their own case? Why should Brown vs. Board of Education have applied to just Linda Brown as opposed to everybody affected?”

Harvey called on Senate leaders to “uphold their oath and block any attempt to weaken the federal courts.”

“Anything less,” she said, “would be walking away from their constitutional duties.”

Common Dream’s work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

  congress, king, trump