DeSantis Courts Proposal

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has put forth a controversial proposal to limit federal court jurisdiction as a means to prevent certain judges from interfering with President Trump’s policies. DeSantis argues that Congress possesses this power under Article III of the Constitution, citing historical precedents such as Thomas Jefferson’s elimination of judgeships in the early 1800s.

The governor recommends attaching these reforms to “must-pass” bills to increase their chances of passing through the Senate. He contends that this strategy would:

• Uphold the executive branch’s integrity
• Counter perceived judicial overreach
• Reassess the balance of power within government branches

Support and Constitutional Basis

Rep. Chip Roy, a Republican from Texas, has voiced support for jurisdiction stripping. Roy suggests passing resolutions acknowledging scenarios like invasions and limiting funding for courts he views as radical.

Article III of the Constitution establishes the judicial branch and grants Congress the power to regulate federal courts’ jurisdiction. DeSantis and his supporters invoke this as a framework for curbing what they perceive as judicial excess.

"Congress has the authority to strip jurisdiction of the federal courts to decide these cases in the first place," DeSantis stated in a social media post.

The proposal involves using legislative tools to prevent lower courts from obstructing executive action. Proponents argue it’s a necessary recalibration in instances of judicial activism, while critics view it as challenging the judiciary’s role in constitutional interpretation.

This proposal tests Congressional commitment to constitutional frameworks and questions how lawmakers interpret their responsibilities. Supporters suggest this moment requires a reaffirmation of legislative authority to ensure the executive branch can function without undue interference from the judiciary.

Debate on Judicial Independence

The debate on judicial independence centers on balancing an independent judiciary with ensuring it doesn’t overstep its bounds. Chief Justice John Roberts has stated that impeachment is unsuitable for disagreements over judicial decisions, emphasizing the appellate system’s role in resolving disputes.

Presidents As Kids!

Donald Trump – 45/47th President (2017-2020 / 2025-present)

Joe Biden – 46th President (2021-2024)

George W. Bush – 43rd President (2001–2009)

Jimmy Carter – 39th President (1977–1981)

Bill Clinton – 42nd President (1993–2001)

Gerald Ford – 38th President (1974–1977)

George H. W. Bush – 41st President (1989–1993)

John F. Kennedy – 35th President (1961–1963)

Lyndon B. Johnson – 36th President (1963–1969)

Richard Nixon – 37th President (1969–1974)

Barack Obama – 44th President (2009–2017)

Ronald Reagan – 40th President (1981–1989)

❮ ❯

DeSantis’ proposal supporters argue that jurisdiction stripping is a constitutional check on perceived judicial activism. They view it as a tool for rebalancing power dynamics when courts are seen to extend their reach beyond judicious interpretation to policymaking.

Critics warn that this strategy could:

• Undermine the judiciary’s role as a co-equal branch of government
• Risk politicizing the courts
• Jeopardize the principle of checks and balances

How can we ensure the judiciary remains independent while also accountable? What are the potential long-term effects of such proposals on our constitutional framework? As we consider these questions, it’s crucial to reflect on the wisdom of our founding documents and their role in safeguarding liberty and justice.

1. U.S. Constitution. Article III.
2. DeSantis R. Social media post on X. [Date unknown]
3. Roy C. Social media post on X. [Date unknown]
4. Roberts J. Statement on judicial impeachment. [Date unknown]