House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan is developing a plan to defund what he terms “anti-MAGA” judges who are obstructing Donald Trump’s agenda.
The influential Ohio Republican and staunch Trump ally has grown frustrated with “political” district judges who have been blocking executive actions aimed at cutting government spending, deporting illegal immigrants, and freezing foreign aid.
Since the start of his term, 15 lower court injunctions have paused White House initiatives—more than the total during Joe Biden’s entire tenure (14) and both of President Barack Obama’s terms combined (12).
More than 50 judicial actions nationwide have already stalled White House initiatives. Trump has condemned these judges as “radical” and described the injunctions as “unlawful.” Also, a growing number of legal experts on the left and right are criticizing what they see as the Judiciary infringing on a president’s Executive Branch authorities.
“Everything’s on the table,” Jordan said when asked about what Congress may do to rein in what he describes as “ridiculous orders” being issued by several mostly Democrat-appointed federal court judges.
He mentioned that legislation is already under consideration to disarm district court judges and others who may use injunctions to block policy changes. Jordan, 61, also pointed out that congressional hearings offer an opportunity to grill judges.
Moreover, Congress holds the constitutional authority to oversee the structure and funding of lower federal courts nationwide, which means Jordan could propose defunding or even eliminating some courts. He added that he has already had several discussions with Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., and others about how Congress can adjust and reorganize court funding.
“I briefly talked to them, and said we want to look at this. So trying to give them a heads up, so we’ll look at, you know, any and all things. And, like I said, everything’s on the table,” Jordan told the outlet. “There may be some other areas where we can look at where the appropriations and the power of the purse and funding makes sense.”
However, Jordan acknowledged that he wasn’t inclined to cut funding for court security—citing the harassment of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh following the landmark Dobbs abortion ruling as a cautionary example.
His plan aligns with Speaker Mike Johnson’s Tuesday remarks, which suggested that Congress has the authority to “eliminate” entire district courts.
In addition to pursuing defunding measures, Jordan is scheduled to hold a hearing next week with U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who has drawn Republican ire for issuing an injunction against the administration’s deportations of Venezuelans under the Alien Enemies Act.
The ruling has faced fierce criticism, with some calling for Boasberg’s impeachment, while Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett described the action as a blatant disregard for Supreme Court precedent.
“What’s so troubling about Boasberg’s restraining order is that he is defying the Supreme Court, which reviewed Harry Truman’s use of the Alien Enemies Act after World War II ended,” Jarrett explained during a network segment earlier this week. “The high court said that not only is the act constitutional under the law of the land, it is not subject to judicial review by any judge.”
“So when a president invokes it, no judge, no court can ever intervene—not even the Supreme Court—because Congress gave the president the exclusive power that is purely political to make decisions on national security and foreign policy,” Jarrett further explained. “Boasberg is duty-bound, as a lower court judge, to follow the ruling of the highest court—the Supreme Court—and butt out. And yet, he is brazenly ignoring Supreme Court precedent.”
Jarrett also noted in a column posted online last week that a previous Supreme Court ruling found that not only is the Act constitutional, but that federal courts have no authority to intervene when a president invokes it.