By Daniel 
Gingrich Warns: Nationwide Injunctions Could Spark a Constitutional Crisis
A heated debate in Congress is brewing over whether district court judges should have the power to issue nationwide injunctions especially since they’ve been a major roadblock for Donald Trump’s policies.
During a House panel discussion, Rep. Darrell Issa pointed out that for most of U.S. history, these kinds of injunctions didn’t exist. “For 180 years, there were none,” he said, explaining that district courts only started using them in the 1960s. But things really escalated during Trump’s first term more than half of all nationwide injunctions in this century happened during those four years. And now? Issa claimed Trump has faced more injunctions in his first nine weeks this year than Biden did in his *entire* presidency.
Gingrich Calls It a “Judicial Coup”
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich went even further, calling the situation a “potential constitutional crisis.” He argued that 15 judges had essentially taken control of key executive branch functions in Trump’s first six weeks.
“This is potentially a judicial coup d’état,” Gingrich warned, saying it goes against 200 years of American history.
For comparison, he pointed out how previous presidents faced far fewer injunctions:
– George W. Bush: 6 in eight years
– Barack Obama: 12 in eight years
– Joe Biden: 14 in four years
– Trump (so far in 2025): 15 in just a few weeks
Rather than trying to impeach judges, which he said would take too long, Gingrich floated a more radical idea just eliminate the courts that are issuing these rulings. He pointed out that back in 1802, President Thomas Jefferson and Congress simply shut down certain courts instead of going through messy impeachment processes.
Democrats Fire Back
Democrats weren’t buying it. Rep. Hank Johnson argued that the real problem isn’t the Courts it’s Trump himself. He accused the former president of ruling like a king, making drastic decisions and only worrying about legal challenges later.
“Trump acts first he deports first, revokes funding first, blacklists law firms first and then questions anyone who challenges him later,” Johnson said.
Paul Larkin, a legal expert from The Heritage Foundation, weighed in as well, saying that issuing nationwide injunctions without a nationwide class-action lawsuit is both legally flawed and a bad idea. It can lead to courts in different states handing down completely opposite rulings, creating chaos.
What Happens Next?
The battle over nationwide injunctions is far from over, with Republicans seeing them as a major roadblock to Trump’s agenda and Democrats arguing they’re necessary checks on executive power. One thing’s clear this fight isn’t slowing down anytime soon.