Republican Senator Chuck Grassley (IA) said that he hopes the Supreme Court will rule against universal injunctions as it hears cases involving President Donald Trump, arguing that a president should not have to "ask permission" from judges to govern.
"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."
"Judges are not policymakers," Grassley said. "Allowing them to assume this role is very dangerous."
Grassley noted that the Supreme Court will be directly addressing universal injunctions on May 15 during a hearing on a case involving Trump's order reversing birthright citizenship.
The high court "could and should take action," he said. "In the meantime, I'm continuing to work with my colleagues to advance my critical Judicial Relief Clarification Act (JRCA) and put an end to universal injunctions."
Trump has been stymied at every turn by these injunctions, which judges at the state and local levels have used far more often to block his offers than they have with other presidents.
"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 declared in March after his colleague Dick Durbin (D-IL) tried to pass a resolution requiring Trump to comply with all federal rulings.
"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. I hope to find a solution for that, and I hope that you and I could work on that together," he added.
The injunction, of course, failed. It's easy to see that many of these rulings are unfair and making them universal goes far beyond the power the Constitution intended to give judges.
Desperate Democrats are out of power and are using the only branch they have any significant power in--the judicial branch--to thwart Trump's agenda any way they can.
Trump needs a way to shut these judges down, or his agenda won't be able to get very far.
The Supreme Court could give him that ability, but it's far from certain what they will do.
There are at least eight major cases involving Trump happening in the near future, so he will have plenty of chances to get a favorable ruling.
We'll see if the will of the voter can prevail or whether Democrats can once again usurp it.
