Attorney General pledges to fight judicial injunctions at the national level

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – US Attorney General Jeff Sessions promised on Thursday to defend himself against federal tribunals that issue injunctions banning the federal government from enforcing regulations at the national level and accused federal judges of "judicial activism." .

In a speech in Missouri, Sessions revealed that he issued new litigation guidelines that he said would "help our departmental lawyers fight against unconstitutional orders" until the Supreme Court of States -United.

National injunctions have become a preferred tool for states and other groups that have strongly opposed many of the Trump administration's controversial policy initiatives.

They allow a single judge in a federal district to block the application of new rules throughout the United States.

The new guidelines invite Justice Department lawyers to defend themselves against cases involving injunctions at the national level.

During the Obama administration, attorneys general and republican-led business groups often sought injunctions at the national level.

Given the sessions, the courts have issued injunctions nationally 25 times since the arrival of Trump.

Among the best-known examples is the injunction of a federal judge in Hawaii to stop Trump's ban on people from certain Muslim countries traveling to the United States.

The sessions then verbally attacked the judge, Derrick Watson, at a conservative television conference titled "The Mark Levin Show": "I'm really surprised that a judge sitting on a Pacific island can issue an order preventing the President of the United States what appears to be clearly his statutory and constitutional power.

Another well-known example involved three different federal court judges who each prevented the Trump administration from canceling the deferred actions for the children, a program that protects against deportation some young immigrants who were illegally brought to the courts. United States as children.

"Increasingly, we are seeing individual federal district judges go beyond the parties in court to issue injunctions or orders preventing the federal government from enforcing any law or policy across the country."

"This trend must stop. We have a government to manage. The Constitution does not grant a single district the power to veto executive actions.