Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett said Monday that activist judges have no constitutional authority to impose nationwide injunctions to block President Donald Trump’s agenda.
The Supreme Court will soon issue a major ruling that could clarify how far lower court judges can go to block Trump’s policies nationwide. During an appearance on “The Evening Edit,” Jarrett said politically motivated judges have exploited legal gray areas to impose sweeping blocks against Trump’s policies, despite lacking the constitutional power to do so.
“There is absolutely nothing in the law that allows these district judges to order anything beyond their own physical district,” Jarrett told Fox Business host Elizabeth MacDonald. “Their jurisdiction is narrowly defined under the Constitution to cases and controversies before them, which means they may not issue orders nationwide that impact millions of people who never set foot inside their courtroom.”
Jarrett blamed what he said was political bias for a breakdown in judicial discipline.
WATCH:
[rumble]https://rumble.com/embed/v6sp63f/?pub=3rtroj[/rumble]
“In the age of Trump, judges are ignoring their duty, ignoring the law. They’re driven by political bias, and the result is unelected judges who think they have unfettered veto power over the president, and the truth is they do not,” Jarrett said.
When asked whether Congress could intervene if the Supreme Court fails to rein in the abuse, Jarrett didn’t hesitate.
“Oh, absolutely, and I think that’s really necessary. The House already passed a bill restricting nationwide injunctions. It’s up to the Senate now to approve it, pass it on to the president for signature,” Jarrett said.
Jarrett said Congress has every right to act.
“Congress created the federal court system, Liz, and it has the power to constrain it. Trump’s been in office less than five months already, [with] 170 lawsuits filed against him, 40 injunctions issued to stop him from implementing his agenda,” Jarrett said. “Voters put him into office for a reason, and judges need to respect that.”
Federal judges blocked Trump’s second-term agenda with 25 sweeping injunctions in just his first 100 days, a May report from the Congressional Research Service said. By contrast, former President Joe Biden saw only four such rulings early in his term, and Trump’s first term faced six.
The Supreme Court in May heard arguments over whether district judges can block the administration’s birthright citizenship order nationwide. The justices may curb the scope of these sweeping rulings.
All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- Gallego makes bold claim about Trump’s intentions toward Venezuela - December 17, 2025
- Scott Jennings clarifies where Wiles stands with Trump after Vanity Fair backlash - December 17, 2025
- Trump orders major escalation against Venezuela - December 17, 2025
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
BPR INSIDER COMMENTS
Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!
