District Court judges are issuing nationwide rulings, even though their jurisdiction is limited to a district that is a legally defined area.
The legal definition of a district is “a territorial division for the administrative, judicial, or other purpose.” The legal definition clearly sets the boundaries where a judge has authority to decide on legal matters only within the defined, limited area. A judge’s authority does not start at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska and extend to Presque Isle, Maine; to San Juan, Puerto Rico; to Guam; and then back the Prudhoe Bay. A District Court judge has neither the legislative nor the legal authority to create such a district.
Article III, Section 1 of our U.S. Constitution makes it clear that Congress, and only Congress, can establish a District Court. When Congress establishes a District Court, it does so to create a court to hear cases within a given geographical area in accordance with the legal definition of a district. There isn’t any writing or interpretation in our Constitution or in the legal definition of a district that expands a judge’s authority beyond the defined limits. If Congress had intended for there to be just one district, Congress would not have created the districts as they are today and would not have authorized 677 judicial positions.
The duty of every judge is to rule on the law and the law only, regardless of any personal beliefs about the law itself. It is central and basic to our orderly civil society governed by the rule of law that legal matters are judged only by the law and the law only.
When District Court or Appellate Court judges enter their personal beliefs into a case, they have added a political element to the law, creating chaos in our legal system because it becomes political law rather than the rule of law.
If it does not act to return to the rule of law, the Supreme Court would be institutionalizing the use of political law to the detriment of our civil society. If all of the 677 authorized judges assumed they could issue nationwide rulings with their political law, the Supreme Court would simply be a referee in a chaotic legal system of its own making. In early April, the Court rejected orders issued by Democrat-appointed district court judges five times.
On April 9, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill limiting the authority of federal district judges to issue nationwide orders. It is not expected to pass the Senate.
