As President Trump Faces an Unprecedented Number of Nationwide Injunctions, Senate Republicans Are Taking Action

Nationwide Injunctions Have Skyrocketed This Year, Causing National Policy to Be Halted by Sweeping and Overzealous Lower Court Rulings

PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS INCURRED, BY FAR, THE MOST NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS IN AMERICAN HISTORY – A DEVELOPMENT DECRIED ACROSS THE LEGAL PROFESSION

“At first, these universal injunctions were uncommon. Courts issued only 27 universal injunctions up until the 21st century. But in recent decades, they have become a fact of life. President Joe Biden faced 14 universal injunctions in his four-year term, and President Donald Trump has surpassed that number in less than four months.” – Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)

“Scholars can find no clear record of a universal injunction issued before 1963. The practice has become common only in the past few decades.” (The Wall Street Journal: Op-ed: A Bill to Stop Nationwide Injunctions – 3/30/25)

“Of the 90 injunctions [issued by federal district courts between 2009 and 2023], 64 were issued against the first Trump Administration in just four years (over half of all such injunctions issued since 1963), while over the twelve years of the Obama and Biden administrations, there were 26 non-party injunctions. According to a very conservative count by the Congressional Research Service, federal district judges have issued another 17 non-party injunctions in just over two months since the start of the second Trump Administration.” (U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary: Testimony of Jesse Panuccio – 4/2/25)

“Political and fiscal implications aside, district judges’ abuse of temporary restraining orders and nationwide injunctions is unconstitutional. Article III of the Constitution tasks the judicial branch with resolving ‘cases’ and ‘controversies,’ not making policy.” (The Wall Street Journal: Op-ed: A Bill to Stop Nationwide Injunctions – 3/30/25)

“‘It just can’t be right,’ Justice Elena Kagan said in remarks in 2022 at Northwestern University’s law school, ‘that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and leave it stopped for the years that it takes to go through the normal process.’” (The New York Times: Several Supreme Court Justices Have Been Critical of Nationwide Injunctions – 5/15/25)

In his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Notre Dame Law School Professor Samuel Bray described nationwide injunctions as “an end-run around the legal provisions we have for representative suits” that present an unfair scenario for litigation: “100 people can challenge a federal policy, and if the government wins 99 of the cases, it won’t matter as long as 1 plaintiff wins and gets a universal injunction. So the government has to run the table.” (U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary: Rule by District Judges II: Exploring Legislative Solutions to the Bipartisan Problem of Universal Injunctions – 4/2/25; U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary: Statement of Professor Samuel L. Bray – 4/2/25)

THESE NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS PREVENT PRESIDENT TRUMP FROM IMPLEMENTING THE POLICIES THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ELECTED HIM TO ENACT

“[A] single federal judge can essentially stop a popularly elected president dead in his tracks by a temporary restraining order, which doesn't just deal with the parties in front of the judge, but literally the whole nation.” – Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)

“Judges across the country have intervened to single-handedly block some of President Trump’s most aggressive policies using nationwide injunctions, sweeping rulings that order the federal government to change its behavior across the country.” (The New York Times: Which Trump Policies Have Been Blocked by Nationwide Injunctions? – 5/15/25)

Overzealous district judges have struck down numerous Trump administration policies, including a “White House effort to revoke Temporary Protected Status for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans.”
- The Supreme Court was forced to step in, “grant[ing] an emergency application” to overturn the injunction, “meaning officials can move forward with reversing a decision made at the tail end of the Biden administration to extend protections for almost 350,000 Venezuelans under the federal Temporary Protected Status program.” (The New York Times: Which Trump Policies Have Been Blocked by Nationwide Injunctions? – 5/15/25; NBC News: Supreme Court allows Trump to revoke protected status for thousands of Venezuelans – 5/19/25)

“In ruling against many of President Trump’s executive orders, district courts have frequently issued nationwide injunctions, halting major initiatives such as Trump’s suspension of foreign aid, removal of undocumented immigrants affiliated with the Tren de Aragua gang, layoffs of federal employees, a ban on transgender soldiers, the end of racially discriminatory programs in higher education, and cuts and freezes in federal spending.” (American Enterprise Institute: Ending Nationwide Injunctions – 5/15/25)

The Trump administration has taken steps to stem the tide of sweeping nationwide injunctions, including a March memorandum issued by President Trump to “demand that parties seeking injunctions against the Federal Government must cover the costs and damages incurred if the Government is ultimately found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained.” (White House: Ensuring the Enforcement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c) – 3/11/25)

- Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) wrote a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi applauding this memorandum and previewed Senate action on the subject: “Please know that my colleagues and I in the Senate are watching this issue closely. I will be working to solve the problem of judicial overreach, and in the meantime, commend the Administration’s efforts to enforce existing law.” (Sen. Grassley: Grassley Denounces Judicial Overreach, Backs President Trump’s Enforcement of Federal Law – 3/17/25)

LED BY CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY, SENATE REPUBLICANS ARE TAKING STEPS TO CURB UNDUE JUDICIAL INTERFERENCE IN PRESIDENTIAL ACTIONS

“Republicans and Democrats alike, including me, have cheered or criticized the policy implications of universal injunctions. But that approach inappropriately politicizes the federal court system and disrupts the balance of powers. Congress ought to put a stop to it for good.” – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)

“Led by U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the Judicial Relief Clarification Act would ban judges from issuing nationwide injunctions in the absence of a class action.” (Courthouse News: Republican senators unveil bill curbing nationwide injunctions – 4/1/25)

“Under this legislation, parties seeking nationwide relief would be required to file a class action lawsuit. The bill would amend the Administrative Procedure Act and the Declaratory Judgment Act to limit courts’ decisions to the parties before them, and make temporary restraining orders (TROs) immediately appealable.” (Sen. Grassley: Grassley Introduces Legislation to Clarify the Scope of Judicial Relief – 3/31/25)

Chairman Grassley’s Judicial Relief Clarification Act:
- “Forbids federal courts from issuing sweeping relief against the government to persons not before the court—ending the practice of universal injunctions and diminishing the incentive to forum shop for a sympathetic judge.”
- “Requires parties seeking universal relief against the government to use the class action process to show that class-wide relief is proper.”
- “Makes temporary restraining orders (TROs) immediately appealable, strengthening appellate review.”
- “Amends the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and Declaratory Judgment Act to clarify that courts may only issue relief under those statutes to parties before the court.” (U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary: The Judicial Relief Clarification Act – 3/31/25)

Professor Bray told committee members that Chairman Grassley’s legislation “would reset the relationship of the three branches, putting it on a sounder constitutional footing.” (U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary: Statement of Professor Samuel L. Bray – 4/2/25)

Next Previous