Biggs Battles to Curb Anti-Trump Bias Among U.S. District Court Judges

By Matthew Holloway |

In response to recent judicial actions that have obstructed key policy decisions, Congressman Andy Biggs of Arizona has introduced the Injunctive Authority Clarification Act. This legislation aims to limit the power of U.S. District Court Judges to enforce nationwide injunctions, which Biggs labels as overreach by “rogue judges.”

Biggs expressed his intentions on social media, stating, “My Injunctive Authority Clarification Act would prohibit rogue judges from making sweeping decisions that affect the whole country. Congress must stand behind President Trump and pass my legislation.”

President Trump has also weighed in on the issue, denouncing the actions of what he calls “Radical Left Judges” in a post on Truth Social. He warned that such unlawful injunctions pose a significant risk to the nation, arguing, “These judges want to assume the powers of the presidency without having to attain 80 million votes.” Trump highlighted the urgency of allowing swift executive action to address criminal threats to national safety.

Among the judicial actions that prompted this legislative response are several injunctions issued by various judges. Chief Judge James Boasberg, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, instructed the Department of Homeland Security to halt deportations of criminal members from terrorist organizations. Other injunctions include a ruling against the Department of Defense related to military service restrictions for transgender individuals and a mandate to reinstate employees dismissed under presidential orders.

Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) announced plans to introduce similar legislation aimed at curbing the ability of local district courts to issue nationwide injunctions. He criticized what he termed a “dramatic abuse of judicial authority,” identifying a rise in such injunctions against the Trump administration as a significant concern.

Biggs’ H.R. 97 seeks to clarify judicial limitations by prohibiting orders that affect non-parties without appropriate representation. If passed, this measure could reshape the landscape of judicial influence over executive actions, amplifying the push from GOP lawmakers to assert legislative authority over judicial decisions that they see as politically motivated.

As debates around the bill unfold, the implications for judicial oversight and executive power remain a point of contention in Congress.

Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.