The US judiciary against Trump's reforms: why Republicans seek to change the rules of the game = Rezazade

A serious political debate is unfolding in Washington about the role of the federal judiciary in limiting the powers of the US president. The current President Donald Trump, who is in his second term, is increasingly facing the blocking of his initiatives due to lawsuits and nationwide injunctions.

According to Ali Reza Rezazade, the first vice president of the Iranian opposition in Washington and an international expert, a powerful movement is currently forming in the US among Republican politicians who advocate limiting the ability of courts to influence the implementation of the decisions of the head of state.

"Republicans openly declare: they want to review the mechanism for issuing nationwide injunctions. And this is not just a reaction to individual precedents. This is a strategic response to the constant interference of the judicial branch in the political governance of the state," Ali Reza Rezadeh notes.

This week, the US Congress will hold hearings on the functioning of the federal judiciary. The House of Representatives is preparing to vote on a bill that would prohibit courts from issuing nationwide injunctions — temporary bans that block the effect of presidential orders throughout the country.

More than 150 cases are currently pending in the courts against the decisions of the Trump administration. The courts have already temporarily blocked more than 40 presidential initiatives. Among them are plans to cut thousands of civil servants, limit federal funding for programs, change policies for transgender military personnel, and abolish the right to citizenship at birth. According to analysts, the courts have stopped the effect of presidential orders worth trillions of dollars in public resources.

According to Ali Reza Rezazadeh, the key problem is that judges are effectively able to stop the implementation of the legitimate policies of the elected president before a full trial is completed. This sets a dangerous precedent that allows a small number of people in the judiciary to influence the will of voters.

At the same time, the expert admits that some of Trump's actions have indeed drawn criticism from lawyers and the public, in particular due to the violation of established legal norms. But even taking this into account, in his opinion, the judiciary should not have unlimited power to stop decisions of the executive branch without a sufficient legal basis.

"This is not just about Trump. Such stopping mechanisms are a threat to any president, regardless of party. They undermine the principle of separation of powers and can be used as a political weapon," Rezazadeh emphasizes.

Other political figures are also expressing their support for the president. In particular, Vice President J.D. Vance and businessman Elon Musk have already suggested the possibility of ignoring court decisions, and administration lawyers are trying to remove judges who demonstrate bias from individual cases.

Yet even so, President Trump, who enjoys steady popular support and a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court, continues to push his reform agenda despite institutional resistance.

Experts believe that the United States faces a challenge to reform the way the branches of government interact. Failure to do so will only exacerbate such conflicts, regardless of who is in power in the future.