Grassley Critiques National Injunctions on Trump’s Policies
Senator Charles Grassley from Iowa expressed confidence that recent judicial rulings signals a shift away from excessive injunctions issued by federal judges, which seem to extend well beyond their jurisdictional limits.
In a recent conversation, Grassley, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, described universal injunctions as an “unconstitutional abuse of the judiciary.” He noted that a recent universal injunction from DC District Judges has prevented the president from enforcing an executive order on voter ID and citizenship requirements for national elections.
Grassley emphasized that such rulings misinterpret the role of judges, stating, “Judges are not policymakers.” He highlighted the concerning trend of increasing injunctions against President Trump’s policies, noting they have doubled compared to those issued against his predecessor.
He pointed out the risk that this trend poses, suggesting that it allows judges to see themselves in roles they shouldn’t occupy. The Supreme Court might be stepping in, as it has agreed to review a nationwide injunction related to Trump’s interpretation of birthright citizenship.
While Grassley aims to advance his Judicial Relief Clarification Act (JRCA) to eliminate universal injunctions, he acknowledges challenges. Some propose using the settlement process to help push the bill through the closely divided Senate, though certain rules complicate its path.
Grassley referenced the significance of the May 15th case, which builds upon historical rulings related to birthright citizenship, particularly citing the 1898 US vs Wong Kim Ark case. The current nationwide injunctions affecting Trump’s birthright citizenship order originate from jurisdictions like Massachusetts, Maryland, and Washington. Grassley argues that the 14th Amendment’s intent was to address the status of former slaves, countering claims that it should apply more broadly.
Earlier in March, Grassley had commented on what Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin considered an unconfirmed promotion in the judiciary. He insisted that the president shouldn’t have to seek permission from numerous district judges to perform his duties effectively.
His concluding remarks indicate a desire for bipartisan cooperation, suggesting that he and his Democratic colleagues could find common ground on this issue, despite some apparent contradictions in their perspectives.
