Mike Johnson stresses Congress' power over courts
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Tuesday drew attention to Congress's power over the federal judiciary as Republicans plot how to legislatively channel their outrage over district judges who have blocked Trump administration actions.
"We do have authority over the federal courts," Johnson said in a press conference Tuesday. "We can eliminate an entire district court. 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."
Johnson clarified that he was not calling to eliminate courts, but rather meant to illustrate Congress's broad scope of authority, Punchbowl News reported.
Article III of the Constitution specifically vests judicial power in the Supreme Court and in "inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." The structure of the district court system, and how they are funded, are determined by Congress.
The Speaker's comments come as President Trump has called to impeach at least one district judge, James Boasberg, who issued a nationwide injunction to block his administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants. Several House Republicans have introduced articles of impeachment against Boasberg and other district judges who have blocked Trump administration actions through nationwide injunctions.
But impeachment is seen as a largely futile effort, given the near-zero chance that at least 14 Senate Democrats would join Republicans in convicting and removing any of the judges. Johnson has not ruled out impeachment, but he said he would leave questions about impeachment to the House Judiciary Committee.
Meanwhile, Republicans are plotting other ways to respond to the judges amid the calls for impeachment. The House is set to vote next week on the No Rogue Rulings Act, a bill led by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) that would limit the power of the nation's nearly 700 district judges to impose nationwide injunctions.
Johnson said that change would be "a dramatic improvement" of the federal court system, calling the historical increase in district judges issuing nationwide injunctions "out of the norm."
"It is a dangerous trend and it violates justice under law, that critical principle. It violates our system itself. It violates separation of powers when a judge thinks that they can enjoin something that a president is doing, that the American people voted for. That is not what the founders intended," Johnson said. "So, there's a natural tension between the branches of the government, and we're working through that."
Johnson said there could be more legislation coming to address Republican concerns with the judiciary.
The House Judiciary Committee is also set to have a hearing next week — likely Tuesday, the panel's Chair Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told The Hill — to examine the issue of nationwide injunctions and other issues that Republicans call "abuses" of judicial authority.
Tags
Who is online
48 visitors
Moses Johnson has spoken.
More amateur hour preening.
that wimp reminds me of the kid we used to torture on the playground in the 60's when he would start preaching ...
I can't believe that the America that I once loved, spent so much time there, travelled through so much of it, attended so many events, met such good people, actually felt safe there, even owned a golf condo in Florida, but all that was decades ago, has turned into a mere caricature of what it once was - overruling 'no man is above the law', tearing the blindfold from Lady Justice's eyes, politically biased courts and judges, SCotUS justices who accept bribes, ignoring due process, 3/4 of a million homeless people, control by government over the courts - welcome to tyranny, an authoritarian government that exceeds all others and you know where I mean. God help the good people in America - due to how they voted and whom they support I have to wonder if there will ever be enough of them to heal the world-wide wounds that it is causing. .
Is this satire? You live in a country where Chinese women are literally sold like slaves with the government's complicity and foreigners are imprisoned and raped for their beliefs.
As this board makes very clear, dissent is still legal and widespread in America. Trump can be mocked to anyone's content. You can even compare hime to Winnie the Pooh without risking prison.
There will be an election in two years and if democrats can avoid advocating for housing illegal aliens in private homes they'll probably win back control of the House, the same pattern that's played out for hundreds of years. Nothing has changed, no one lost any rights and the world will keep spinning despite the hysterics from people who've seen a nazi under every pillow for decades.
Your opinions about China are delusional, but I'm not surprised since they're not based on personal experience, but on the words of those who have some bone to pick with China or thinking that it raises themselves or those they represent if an enemy is created as a deflection or contrast. Anyone who has spent more than a few days in China, and there are some who are NT members including myself, would find your criticisms laughable, even if taken from a medium that thinks that sensationalism can sell, or an individual that has some personal reason to be hateful.
Yet another in the endless list of Trump attempts to bully government entities. "Nice little court you have there. It would be a shame if it disappeared. "
The vast majority of Federal Courthouses are leased so Mike could just call Elon to cancel a lease, or fire the staff...
But this sure looks like a kindergarten meltdown...
I probably be cautious mentioning anything to do with kindergartens around a stressed out evangelical like mike ...
Exactly
He’s correct. Congress, since it’s the most responsible to the people, was designed to be the most powerful branch of government. But congress has, for generations, abdicated that power in pursuit of not doing anything controversial in order to get relented.
It's hilarious that the left is all up in arms about the current administration blowing off a district judge while they were silent when the last administration did it.
The last administration set the precedent, don't get pissy when others follow suit.
When the last Administration did it you were all up in arms....
The last administration set no precedent. Your historical references appear to be nonexistent.
past Presidents have not only tested the patience and jurisdictions of District Courts but the Supreme Court itself,
Jackson, Regan, Clinton, Bush, Obama and Bush and others.
'Buttttt the left and Biden' is not a convincing position to defend.
I gave you the links to get you started.
Don't really care what you "need" or what you think about my attitude.
Have a nice day.
I can’t make your links work. Maybe you could summarize your examples of proof here.
They work just fine for me.
Oh well then maybe you could help out.
They work well for others.
If you don’t know, or can’t explain it, it’s fine. [deleted][✘]
So when SCOTUS told Biden he couldn't forgive student loans, Biden immediately started plotting to eliminate the supreme court or a Michigan AG because they disagreed with him???
Biden immediately started plotting to eliminate the supreme court or a Michigan AG because they disagreed with him???
Democrats did, of course, plot to pack the Supreme Court with party activists and Democrats in Congress publicly called for Supreme Court rulings to be ignored. not to mention of course threaten Supreme court justices which led an activist to try and kill a Justice.
Citation??? If you want to compare apples to apples, cite what "ACTIONS" were taken...
Because of the historical idiocy of the PotUS. Johnson is such a slimy sycophant. Sickening.
"It is a dangerous trend and it violates justice under law, that critical principle. It violates our system itself. It violates separation of powers when a judge thinks that they can enjoin something that a president is doing, that the American people voted for. That is not what the founders intended," Johnson said"
Do you agree? Yes or no.
No, this is a constitutional check on the Executive branch by the Judicial branch.
Johnson is a Trump sycophant who knows better but is lying as usual.
The Judicial branch has clear constitutional authority to interpret the law and that includes the law when applied to Executive orders.
No this is basic civics class year one.
5th Grade Social Studies in most states...
Yes, "Checks And Balances", Mike, "Checks And Balances"...
Mike knows what to do with a check book but is lost when it comes to balances...
MAGA is on a power 'trip' and it will take any fool it can get on the 'ride' of his or her lives. These 'argument's are specious. That is, not properly thought out, but the expectation is the public will accept the "alternative' to a proper answer. . . because we all know if you look at words strung together you can 'almost' suggest they mean anything.
The intent of the constitution to the three branches of government was for them to have checks on each other for corrective purposes of one or other 'blemish' found within them. It is not so as each separate branch could 'GANG UP' (2) and coerce its OUTSTANDING BRANCH (1) into bowing to any one man. Thus causing a 'complete' and utter breakdown between the faith and trust people put in the 'lot' of them!
We have had enough of these fools 'jangling' every order in this country? When are the people going to get off their butts and 'do' something. We don't look so smart to the free world any more.
When far leftist TDS driven judges put injunctions on the federal government not based on the law; but only on their feelings- they need to be removed'
DC has a ton of far leftist TDS driven judges who have overstepped their authority repeatedly.
We all know that if the positions were reversed Democrats wouldn't hesitate to ignore their rulings; and impeach their asses.
That comment show a partisan disregard for the U.S. Constitution powers of the three branches of government. If MAGA has given up on the constitution: Just say so.
[deleted][✘]
It is 'high' time that our CONGRESS return to its senses. . . if we are going to have two parties in congress . . .and only one party governance with little to no compromise with the other party. . . then, "DOGE" will soon realize that it can makes good sense that the MINORITY PARTY not even bother to come to work until a new election time, for efficiency sake.
Of course, these are constitutional officials. . . but we have seen strange interactions between the branches of the federal government of recent!
Watch out congress, it may be that you all are putting yourselves out of work!