Republican Lawmakers Introduce Bill to End Nationwide Legal Injunctions

freebeacon ^ | SEPTEMBER 11, 2019 | Graham Piro

[Rusty0604]

Here’s a good example.

The official told the Daily Caller, “Today, the Trump Administration announced its repeal of President Obama’s oppressive WOTUS regulation. For years, this rule has been used by government agencies to punish farmers and private land owners with out-of-control fines and imprisonment for simply working to protect or better their property. This is another promise kept for our farmers and ranchers as President Trump continues to remove crushing regulations from the American people.”
The Trump administration initially tried to re-write the WOTUS rules in 2018, but they were blocked by a court injunction

https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/12/trump-epa-clean-water-regulation-rollback/

[pas]

Of course they waited until the Dems have the house when it has no hope of passing. Had 2 years to do it but did not.

[TexasGator]

“I believe District Courts are Federal, not state.”

District decisions are binding only in that district.

[MeganC]

The President could just ignore these unconstitutional edicts from petulant dictators in black robes. It really is that simple.

[Dr. Zzyzx]

I was responding to Sacajaweau’s use of the word “state”:

Barr has been turning the wheels to make this happen. The idea that one STATE COURT can rule for all States is absurd.

[P-Marlowe]

Congress should simply strip all lower courts from hearing any challenge to any executive order. Make any challenge go directly to the Supreme Court.

[Lazamataz]

As a practical matter, the U.S. Supreme Court did this yesterday.

Out of session, too. And by way of a 7-2 vote.

[Pearls Before Swine]

The Courts will find this bill unconstitutional.

[itsahoot]

'This bill will restore respect for the system of government outlined in the Constitution' This Bill will never get to the floor even if it did it will not pass as long as dems are in charge.

[itsahoot]

Out of session, too. And by way of a 7-2 vote.

But it only applied to that one issue.

[Jacquerie]

Bingo. Also, IMHO, John Roberts could inform lower court judges they don’t have the authority.

But rats like preventing PDJT from rescinding Bammy’s executive orders, so the Cotton/Meadows bill will go nowhere.

Its judicial tyranny. Thank the 17th.

[Political Junkie Too]

-PJ

[usnavy_cop_retired]

They should add that a state that wishes to sue the Federal government must file the suit in their own federal district. This would eliminate the judge shopping that blue states use to avoid a Federal district court in their district that is conservative. In other words, Indiana should not be allowed to join a suit in California concerning a government policy/regulation. They would have to file in their own district. That way the USSC gets several different decisions and different facts that would have been presented during trial, (Indiana in this example), that may not be presented in a trial in the other district, (California).