Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., huddled privately with House Judiciary Committee members on Tuesday afternoon for what was described as a “brainstorming” session on how to take on “activist judges” blocking President Donald Trump’s agenda.
The House is scheduled to vote next week on a bill to limit U.S. district judges in ordering nationwide injunctions. But the consensus among Republicans on the committee is that the bill by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., is a good start, but more reform would be needed.
“He came to offer his thoughts to the committee and [Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio], about… what’s available to us related to the judges,” Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis., told Fox News Digital. “So it was more like a brainstorming kind of thing. No decisions were made.”
He said there was also “general” discussion about court funding – as senior Republicans publicly float the idea of using Congress’ appropriations powers to rein in activist judges.
WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S DEPORTATION EFFORTS?
“The purse strings related to the courts – how does that work, what do we have available to us, what don’t we, if we want to have that impact,” Fitzgerald said. “But I mean, nobody spelled out ‘Here’s what we’re going to do when it comes to funding.'”
The Wisconsin Republican said the idea of legislating in a fast-tracked appeals process was also floated during the meeting.
It’s an idea also backed by his fellow Judiciary member Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., who declined to share details of the meeting with Fox News Digital but said “there’s other solutions” beyond next week’s vote.
“I think that it’s worth exploring some sort of expedited appeals process, right? So you can fast-track an appeal if there’s an injunction issue, to the D.C. circuit and ultimately to the Supreme Court,” Kiley said. “I think that’d be another way to approach the problem.”
“But yeah, it’s an unfortunate state of affairs when you have someone, whose decisions are very much subject to appeal and reversal, who can keep administration policy in stasis.”
A source briefed on the discussion told Fox News Digital that Johnson also signaled to House Judiciary Republicans that he was in close contact with the White House on the GOP judiciary strategy.
The source described part of the conversation as a bid to rally Republicans behind the No Rogue Rulings Act, which is expected to get a House-wide vote either Tuesday or Wednesday next week, as of now.
Led by Issa, the legislation would force most district court judges to narrow most orders to the most relevant scope, therefore blocking them from pausing Trump’s policies across the U.S.
Fitzgerald said part of the discussion with Johnson also focused on legislation to limit the ability of progressive plaintiffs to so-called “judge-shop.”
It’s a similar idea to an amendment by Rep. Derek Schmidt, R-Kan., a first-term Republican on the committee, that is already attached to Issa’s bill.
“On the forum shopping issue, the amendment I’ve got on the Issa bill addresses that, and makes it more difficult to engage in judge shopping because it requires that any request for a nationwide injunction is properly brought,” Schmidt told Fox News Digital. “It would go to a three-judge panel that’s randomly selected.”
‘WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT’: US JUDGE REAMS TRUMP ADMIN FOR DAYS-LATE DEPORTATION INFO
The Kansas Republican suggested House Judiciary members were interested in looking at what could be long-lasting reform.
“I do think there are other opportunities. And one of the things I think is very important is that – not just on this issue, but more generally – we think…about how we can make long-term, lasting change that will outlast any of us who are serving in office right now and leave the system better than we found it,” he said.
Fox News Digital reached out to the speaker’s office and the Judiciary Committee for comment but did not immediately hear back.
Jordan is expected to hold a hearing on April 1 examining judicial activism.
Read the full article here
