On Tuesday, former Speaker of the Home Newt Gingrich testified earlier than the Home Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Mental Property, Synthetic Intelligence, and the Web and the Subcommittee on the Structure and Restricted Authorities about judicial overreach.
Gingrich referred to as the unprecedented variety of injunctions a possible “judicial coup d’etat” that “clearly violates the Structure and greater than 200 years of American historical past.”
I thank Chairmen Issa and Roy, Rating Members Johnson and Scanlon, and all of the members of the Subcommittees for permitting me to testify. There may be clearly a possible constitutional disaster involving the Judicial Department’s effort to totally override the Legislative and Govt branches.
Fifteen District Judges successfully seized management of assorted Govt Department duties within the first six weeks of the present presidency by nationwide injunctions. That is doubtlessly a judicial coup d’etat. It clearly violates the Structure and greater than 200 years of American historical past.
To set the stage for this listening to, let me point out 12 former federal judges appointed by President John Adams: Richard Bassett, Egbert Benson, Benjamin Bourne, William Griffith, Samuel Hitchcock, Phillip Barton Kay, Jeremiah Smith, George Keith Taylor, Oliver Wolcott Jr., Williams McClung, Charles Magill, and Williams Tilghman.
President Adams appointed these Federalist judges on his means out of workplace to hamstring in-coming President Thomas Jefferson’s agenda.
President Jefferson concluded that impeaching the judges would take an excessive amount of time. He and the Congress merely abolished the courts by which they served by way of the Judiciary Act of 1802.
That is constitutional steadiness of energy. The Legislative and Govt Branches can reshape the Judiciary Department. It’s a helpful reminder in contemplating the present state of affairs.
Unelected lower-court judges have been steadily grabbing energy for years. It was such an apparent menace that in 2012, Vince Haley and I wrote “Bringing the Court docket Again beneath the Structure.” It’s an historic examine which I’m submitting for the Document.
In accordance with Harvard Law Review, there have been 96 nationwide injunctions ordered by District Courts from 2001 to 2023. Two-thirds of them (64) had been issued throughout President Trump’s time in workplace. Moreover, 92 p.c of the injunctions towards President Trump had been issued by judges appointed by Democratic presidents.
Since January 20, 2025, decrease courts have imposed 15 nationwide injunctions towards the present Trump administration. That is in comparison with six throughout George W. Bush’s eight-years, 12 throughout Barack Obama’s eight years, and 14 throughout Joe Biden’s four-year time period.
The notion that unelected attorneys can micromanage the Govt Department – and override a Commander in Chief who acquired 77.3 million votes – ought to hassle each American.
That is significantly troubling for problems with nationwide protection and public security. Round 500 B.C., Solar T’zu asserted in The Artwork of Conflict that “pace is the essence of warfare.” How can the USA have pace in nationwide safety points if opponents can judge-shop to search out somebody formidable or boastful sufficient to dam, repudiate, or delay the President’s choices?
There are 677 approved district judgeships. What number of suppose they will override duly elected Presidents?
This abstract assertion has 4 propositions:
First, the courts have usually been challenged.
President Jefferson wrote “judges as the last word arbiters of all constitutional questions… would place us beneath the despotism of an oligarchy.”
President Andrew Jackson was in fixed fights with the Supreme Court docket.
President Abraham Lincoln made the Dred Scott choice increasing slavery a middle piece of his 1858 senatorial marketing campaign. In his first inaugural President Lincoln warned that if the Supreme Court docket had supreme rule, “the folks can have ceased to be their very own rulers, having to that extent virtually resigned their Authorities into the palms of that eminent tribunal.”
Second, because the Judiciary Act of 1802 proves, the Legislative and Govt branches can constitutionally defend their rights – and so they have previously. It’s traditionally and constitutionally fallacious to suppose the Legislative and Govt branches are helpless towards Judiciary actions.
Third, the Supreme Court docket may intervene to get rid of this assault on the Govt Department by District Judges.
Chief Justice Roberts may finish the rising confrontation by establishing a rule that any nationwide injunction issued by a District Court docket towards the Govt Department could be suspended in implementation and instantly taken up by the Supreme Court docket. This may treatment the prolonged appeals course of.
Fourth, the Congress and the President can take decisive steps towards bringing the Judiciary again right into a constitutional framework.
This listening to is an efficient first step. There may very well be a sequence of hearings on the constitutional and historic framework which ensures no single department of presidency can purchase dictatorial powers – particularly the Judiciary on this committee.
These hearings would educate the members and the American folks. They might create a nationwide understanding of the necessity to defend the Structure towards overreaching branches of presidency.
I might additionally advocate the Congress cross Chairman Issa’s No Rogue Rulings Act, which is an efficient sign to the Courts that they’ve gone too far.
Thanks and I sit up for your questions.
