Bill · S. 1090· Senate(119-S-1090)
Restraining Judicial Insurrectionist Act of 2025
- Introduced
- 3/24/2025
- Last activity
- 3/24/2025 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- Mike Lee
- Cosponsors
- - 1 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the "Restraining Judicial Insurrectionist Act of 2025," aims to amend section 2284 of title 28, United States Code. It seeks to establish special procedures for civil actions that attempt to restrain actions or executive orders of the President. The bill changes how three-judge district courts are convened for these specific types of cases. It introduces specific requirements for the selection of judges and the number of judges needed to grant relief. Additionally, it limits the power of single judges regarding the appointment of masters or magistrates in these matters.
Yes
Does this give the federal government more power?+5
The bill strengthens the executive branch by imposing stricter procedural requirements and majority-rule mandates on judicial efforts to restrain presidential or departmental actions.
The opposite
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?-3
The requirement for a majority decision and the restriction on single-judge appointments could slow the judicial process for individuals seeking relief against the government.
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?-2
By centralizing the selection of judges through the Chief Justice and requiring majority decisions, the bill alters the traditional transparency of local judicial oversight of the executive.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Randomized Judge Selection: Under Section 2, subsection (c)(1)(A), the Chief Justice of the United States would designate three judges at random from a list of all judges in active service. This process ensures that the judges are selected from across different circuits rather than just the local area.
-
Requirement of a Majority Decision: According to Section 2, subsection (c)(2), no temporary restraining order, stay, preliminary injunction, or other equitable relief can be granted unless a majority of the district court orders it. This means a single judge cannot unilaterally grant such relief in these specific actions.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restriction on Judicial Relief: Section 2, subsection (a)(1)(B) and subsection (c)(2) change the triggers for when these procedures apply, specifically when an action seeks declaratory relief, injunctions, or stays against the executive branch. This could impact the ability of individuals to receive quick relief through a single judge.
-
Limitation on Judicial Appointments: Under Section 2, subsection (c)(3), no single judge is permitted to appoint a master, order a reference to a magistrate judge, or hear applications for preliminary or permanent relief in these specific types of actions. This limits the traditional procedural tools available to a single presiding judge in these cases.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power+5Improves Due Process-3Improves Government Transparency-2
- 3/31/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/24/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Introduced in Senate
Bernie MorenoRepublican · Ohio