House Speaker Mike Johnson has sparked significant debate regarding the authority of Congress over the federal judiciary, asserting that lawmakers possess broad powers to influence the courts. During a press conference held on March 25, 2025, Johnson emphasized, "We do have authority over the federal courts. We can eliminate an entire district court, we have power of funding over the courts and all these other things. But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act." This statement comes as Congress grapples with the implications of recent judicial rulings that have blocked actions from President Donald Trump's administration.
Johnson's remarks were partly in response to U.S. District Judge James Boasberg's recent decision to halt the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members, a ruling that has drawn the ire of Trump and his supporters. Following the ruling, Trump publicly called for Boasberg's impeachment, a sentiment echoed by several House Republicans who have introduced articles of impeachment against the judge. However, these efforts are likely to be stymied by the Democratic majority in the Senate, which makes it difficult to bypass the filibuster.
In a broader context, Johnson's comments signal a growing frustration among Republican lawmakers regarding what they perceive as an overreach by federal judges. He labeled the actions of judges who block presidential initiatives as part of a "dangerous trend" that undermines the separation of powers. "It violates our system itself, it violates separation of powers when a judge thinks they can enjoin something that a president is doing," Johnson stated.
Adding to the complexity, the House Judiciary Committee, led by Rep. Jim Jordan, is preparing to hold a hearing on the matter, expected to take place on April 1, 2025. The committee is discussing various legislative options to counter what they describe as "activist judges" who have issued nationwide injunctions against Trump's policies. Johnson's comments reflect a broader strategy among Republicans to curtail the power of judges seen as obstructing the administration's agenda.
One proposed legislative solution is the No Rogue Rulings Act (NORRA), spearheaded by Rep. Darrell Issa. This bill aims to limit the authority of district judges to issue nationwide injunctions, effectively narrowing the scope of their orders. Johnson has characterized this legislation as a "dramatic improvement" to the federal court system, arguing that such injunctions violate the intended balance of power among the branches of government.
However, the path forward for this legislation remains uncertain. While it has garnered support from both the White House and House GOP leadership, there is skepticism about its prospects in the Senate. Republican Senator Josh Hawley expressed concerns that aggressive judicial reforms could exacerbate existing court backlogs, suggesting a preference for appointing more Republican judges rather than restructuring the courts altogether.
Furthermore, while impeachment resolutions against judges have been introduced by some Republican members, Johnson has indicated a reluctance to pursue this route. He noted that only 15 federal judges have been impeached in U.S. history, emphasizing that impeachment should be reserved for judges guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, rather than simply those whose decisions lawmakers disagree with.
In the backdrop of these discussions, the current tally of lawsuits against the Trump administration stands at 139, highlighting the ongoing legal battles that the administration faces. Critics argue that executive orders, which are often the subject of these lawsuits, should not be treated as laws but rather as policy recommendations that require congressional action to become effective.
As the House prepares to vote on the NORRA bill, Republican leaders are also considering leveraging their power over funding to rein in what they term "activist courts." Johnson reiterated this point, stating, "We do have power over funding, over the courts and all these other things. But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act." This rhetoric underscores the increasing tension between the legislative and judicial branches of government.
In summary, Johnson's statements reflect a significant shift in how congressional Republicans view their relationship with the federal judiciary. As they seek to assert their authority over the courts, the implications for judicial independence and the balance of powers are profound. With the NORRA bill and other legislative measures on the table, the coming weeks will be critical in determining how Congress navigates its role in relation to the judiciary.
