Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa is continuing his push to end the use of nationwide injunctions by federal district judges, a practice he says is a clear overreach of judicial authority.
In an interview with Fox News Digital, Grassley, who serves as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, reaffirmed his support for the Judicial Relief Clarification Act (JRCA), legislation designed to curb the ability of federal judges to issue universal injunctions—rulings that block federal actions nationwide, not just within the judge’s jurisdiction.
“Universal injunctions are an unconstitutional abuse of judicial power,” Grassley said.
Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?
MORE NEWS: House GOP Steps In to Repair Biden’s Oil Reserve Disaster, DOE Head Says 4-6 Years [WATCH]
The senator pointed to a recent example as evidence of the issue’s urgency.
“Just this past week, a D.C. district judge issued a universal injunction blocking the president’s executive order requiring voter ID or proof-of-citizenship prior to voting in national elections,” he told Fox News Digital.
Grassley argued such decisions undermine the separation of powers, saying, “Judges are not policymakers. Allowing them to assume this role is very dangerous.”
His remarks come as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments on May 15 in a case involving the Trump administration’s attempt to reinterpret birthright citizenship—a case that could have broad implications for the future use of nationwide injunctions.
This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year
The lawsuit challenges the longstanding precedent set by the 1898 Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which determined that a child born on U.S. soil to foreign parents is a U.S. citizen under the 14th Amendment.
The Trump administration has argued that this provision was originally intended to apply specifically to the children of freed slaves—not to all children born to non-citizen parents.
Federal judges in Massachusetts, Maryland, and Washington state blocked President Trump’s executive order on the matter through universal injunctions.
The president defended the move at the time, saying the language of the 14th Amendment had been misapplied for decades.
Grassley’s JRCA legislation would clarify that federal district court rulings are binding only within their geographic jurisdiction, eliminating the ability to impose nationwide decisions.
While some allies have discussed using the budget reconciliation process to pass the measure, that strategy would likely be blocked by the Byrd Rule, which prohibits non-budgetary legislation from advancing through reconciliation.
“In the meantime, I’m continuing to work with my colleagues to advance my critical Judicial Relief Clarification Act and put an end to universal injunctions,” Grassley said.
The Iowa senator has been vocal about judicial overreach in recent months.
“These national injunctions have been used to fight Pres. Trump’s agenda.”@ChuckGrassley explains his bill—the Judicial Relief Clarification Act—to stop district judges from dictating national policies. pic.twitter.com/cRBC9DVkpt
— Tony Perkins (@tperkins) April 1, 2025
In March, he criticized a resolution from Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., which called on President Trump to comply with all federal court rulings.
“The President of the United States shouldn’t have to ask permission from more than 600 different district judges to manage the executive branch he was elected to lead,” Grassley said in response.
He also noted that Democrats have historically raised similar concerns.
“I happen to agree with some Democrats that in previous years have said some judges have gone way beyond what a judge should do on national injunctions,” he added.
“I hope to find a solution for that, and I hope that you and I could work on that together.”
The Supreme Court’s forthcoming ruling could determine whether nationwide injunctions remain a tool for district courts or whether their authority will be more narrowly defined moving forward.
Connect with Vetted Off-Duty Cops to Instantly Fulfill Your Security Needs
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.
Congress can pass laws to that effect. Grassly though is right and it shouldn’t literally take an act of Congress to reaffirm what is already established law.
Wong Kim’s parents were legal residents of CA and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But the decision that he was a citizen was not correct based on the original intent of the 14th Amendment. Do some dang research. The US Senate Debate of 1866 which was held 2 years before the 14th was passed (it was not ratified and really should be repealed) in which they laid out the terms and conditions of the 14th Amendment. They CLEARLY stated that people born on US soil were citizens as long as their parents were not foreign or they were the children of foreign Ambassadors. We have allowed this government to lie and twist the Constitution to push their agenda. The 14th clearly states you must be born on US soil or naturalized AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF. A person who flies or sneaks across our border is not subject to the judisdiction thereof so they do not meet the 2nd part of the requirement. WAKE THE HECK UP. READ the Constitution and then do research as to the original intent which has not change. The Constitution IS NOT a living document. It means the same thing today as it did when it written. The children of illegals ARE NOT US CITIZENS. End of story.
The word District has a meaning. It means a certain area and no more. A District Judge represents that District and no more. So it is time for those self important Judges get back in their fenced in peradime of a life and let the man that was elected by people in every state of the union, do his job. I am not a lawyer, but even I know the President over rules a dinky District Judge.
The Democrats have perfected another way to stop Trump’s agenda by using rouge judges. These democratic appointed judges have been playing politics by using national injunctions against Trump’s executive orders. These judges are not elected by the people; they have gone up against the executive branch stopping what the American people voted for. Hopefully Grassley will be successful in bringing legislation to prevent the judicial who should be interpreting the law, not setting policies by the judicial branch.
The Supreme Court is the only judiciary in the Constitution. All the lower Federal courts were created by acts of Congress. Therefore, additional acts of Congress can restrict the scope and if necessary disband any lower court. Senator Grassley is absolutely correct in his starting this process.