If you’ve paid attention to the news lately, you’d think you were living in the movie “Groundhog Day” where the Bill Murray character is forced to live the same day over and over again. So it is with the lower courts and the Trump administration, where it seems as if not an afternoon goes by without some judge you’ve never heard of stepping in and thwarting Donald Trump’s agenda.

If you think it seems different than in the past, the numbers prove that you’re not imagining it:

The Republicans may have complete control of Congress, but President Trump still has a major roadblock to carrying out his agenda — the courts.

The lower courts blocked more of Trump’s executive orders in his first two months of office than they did for other recent commanders in chief during their entire terms.

The lower courts have slapped at least 15 national injunctions against Trump so far this year.

That drastically outpaces the six against former President George W. Bush during his entire presidency and the 12 against former President Barack Obama and the 14 against former President Joe Biden for their whole time in office, too, according to a tally from Harvard Law Review.

Unbelievable.

It takes 5 Supreme Court justices to issue a ruling that affects the whole nation. Yet lone District Court judges assume the authority to unilaterally dictate the policies of the entire executive branch of government. https://t.co/YdLGuDa03i

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) March 20, 2025

I could fill the rest of the article with links to stories we’ve written about the many injunctions and TROs, but here are just a few:

Read Related: Radical Judge Blocks Trump Admin's Military Transgender Ban - but There's a Problem

Déjà vu All Over Again: Another Federal Judge Tries to Thwart Trump Agenda, Goes to Bat for USAID

Here’s how the process has changed over time. Doesn’t it seem that so many bad things stem back from the Obama years?

How it works: Lawsuits against the federal government start in a district court — there are more than 600 district-court judges — then can move to an appeals court, then the Supreme Court.

• In the old days, district courts' rulings only applied to the parties before them. But since the beginning of the Obama administration, those judges have become increasingly willing to say their rulings apply nationwide — the same scope a Supreme Court decision has.

GOP lawmakers are trying to find ways to rein in lone judges – none of whom received 77 million votes and a mandate to run the country—and prevent them from unilaterally dictating policy to the entire United States. Some are floating impeachments, an idea that Supreme Court Justice John Roberts strongly rebuked in a statement, or crafting legislation to limit abuses.

The House is working overtime to limit the abuses of activist federal judges. Our @JudiciaryGOP will expose the worst offenders in a high profile hearing & we are preparing urgent legislative action, like the @repdarrellissa bill to stop unfounded nationwide injunctions. pic.twitter.com/3KZP80NgSk

— Speaker Mike Johnson (@SpeakerJohnson) March 22, 2025

I’m open-minded enough to consider that some of these rulings are in fact fair, but the sheer number of them—especially compared with historical precedent—is simply impossible to ignore. 

And deeply troubling. 

Judges nationwide keep thwarting the Trump agenda and dictating policy to the entire United States.

Help us keep exposing them, and consider becoming part of the RedState team and joining our VIP membership today. Use promo code FIGHT to get a whopping 60% off.