Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) presented himself as a law expert during a congressional hearing on Tuesday concerning a nationwide injunction issued by a district court judge against the Trump administration.
During the Senate Joint Lawyer Subcommittee hearings, I showcased a graph illustrating that the number of injunctions against Trump significantly exceeds those issued against recent U.S. presidents.
“Don’t you find this somewhat outrageous?” Hawley questioned Professor Kate Shaw from the University of Pennsylvania Law School.
“A plausible explanation, Senator, is that he [Trump] engages in far more lawless activities than other presidents,” Shaw replied. “You must consider that possibility.”
Hawley noted that national injunctions used to halt or delay actions of the administrative department had not been prevalent before the 1960s, stating, “Suddenly, a Democratic judge embraced the national injunction when Biden took office.”
Shaw, who contributes to ABC News on Supreme Court matters, clarified that Republican-appointed justices also issue injunctions against the administration, explaining that the 1960s is where many scholars pinpoint the beginning of this trend.
A professor who worked in the Obama White House mentioned another academic who contends that such national injunctions actually have roots dating back to 1913.
“The federal government’s scope was much more limited until about a century ago,” Shaw remarked. “A lot has changed in the past 100 years or even the last 50 years.”
“We seem to have a national injunction only when a Democratic president is in office,” Hawley asserted during their exchange. “If a Republican president is in charge, this becomes a serious issue that is actively sought after.”
During Trump’s second term, judges have blocked the president’s initiatives on large-scale deportations, cuts to federal funding, and attempts to cease federal worker programs and tariffs.
Other Republican senators expressed their dissatisfaction with the judge’s decisions in the Tuesday hearing. Congressional Republicans had proposed measures earlier this year to limit national injunctions, arguing that they should not be issued, while Democrats maintained that judges were simply fulfilling their roles.
The Missouri senator also inquired, “How can our legal system sustain its principles, Professor?”
“A system without checks on presidential power is quite dangerous,” Shaw responded.
Hawley retorted that this was not the argument former President Biden utilized while in office.
“You described it as a tragedy of democratic principles, the concept of judicial equity, and the rule of law,” Hawley stated.
“You also indicated that when Joe Biden was president, the notion that anyone would seek out a judge to challenge nationally was akin to looking for a rogue politician. Once again, it jeopardized the fundamental legal system in its pursuit of favorable outcomes.”
Source: thehill.com