Is there a judicial coup against Trump? Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is set to sound the alarm on what he calls a “potential judicial coup d’etat” orchestrated by Democrat-appointed federal judges against President Donald Trump.
At a glance:
- Newt Gingrich will testify before Congress about alleged judicial overreach targeting Trump
- 15 district judges have issued nationwide injunctions that override Executive Branch duties
- 92% of injunctions against Trump were issued by Democrat-appointed judges
- Gingrich supports the “No Rogue Rulings Act” to limit judicial overreach
- Former Speaker calls for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to review all nationwide injunctions
Former Speaker Warns of Judicial Coup
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is prepared to deliver a stark warning to lawmakers about what he describes as a “potential judicial coup d’etat” by federal judges working against President Donald Trump. His testimony will focus on the American judicial system and the alarming impact of judicial orders that have repeatedly blocked President Trump’s agenda.
According to reports, Gingrich will appear alongside Heritage Foundation Legal Scholar Paul Larkin and Tren de Aragua victim Cindy Romero at the congressional hearing organized by two House Judiciary Committee subcommittees. The former Speaker plans to highlight how 15 district judges have issued nationwide injunctions that effectively override Executive Branch duties, creating a possible constitutional crisis.
Democrat-Appointed Judges Target Trump
Gingrich’s analysis reveals that the number of injunctions against Trump significantly exceeds those issued against previous presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden. Even more revealing is his finding that 92% of these injunctions were issued by judges appointed by Democratic presidents, suggesting a clear political bias.
“The notion that unelected lawyers can micromanage the Executive Branch should trouble every American,” Gingrich states in prepared remarks for the hearing. His concern centers on how these judicial actions represent an unprecedented power grab by unelected officials seeking to undermine the duly elected president’s authority.
“There is clearly a potential constitutional crisis involving the Judicial Branch’s effort to fully override the Legislative and Executive branches,” he stated.
Solutions to Judicial Overreach
To tackle judicial overreach, Gingrich calls for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to require Supreme Court review of any nationwide injunctions issued by lower courts. This proposal would introduce a crucial check on lower court judges who currently wield enormous power through nationwide injunctions.
Additionally, Gingrich strongly supports the “No Rogue Rulings Act,” which would limit judges to issuing injunctions only applicable to the specific parties involved in a case. Heritage Foundation scholar Paul Larkin will reinforce this position, arguing that nationwide injunctions without proper class action certification are both legally unsound and extend beyond the parties involved in litigation.
The Trump administration has repeatedly sought Supreme Court intervention in disputes with federal district court judges, although with limited success thus far. Conservative legal experts suggest that the judiciary’s increasing willingness to block presidential actions is a dangerous trend that undermines the constitutional separation of powers.
