1. United States
2. Kan.
3. Letter

The No Rogue Rulings Act of 2025 (NORRA) seeks to limit the authority of district courts to issue nationwide injunctions against executive actions, except in cases brought by multiple states from different circuits. While the intent may be to preserve the separation of powers, this legislation raises concerns about the ability to effectively challenge potentially unconstitutional executive overreach. Nationwide injunctions have served as an important check on executive orders that extend beyond constitutional bounds or statutory authority. By barring district courts from issuing broad injunctive relief except in multi-state cases, NORRA risks emboldening executive actions that violate individual rights or exceed executive power. It is crucial to maintain robust judicial review to uphold the rule of law and protect against abuse of executive authority. Rather than categorically restricting the scope of injunctive relief, a more balanced approach would be to provide clear standards for nationwide injunctions while preserving the ability of district courts to issue them when warranted. This would safeguard the judiciary's role in checking executive overreach while addressing any legitimate concerns about overuse of nationwide injunctions. I urge you to critically examine the potential consequences of NORRA on preserving constitutional checks and balances. Ensuring accountability and adherence to the law should be prioritized over attempts to insulate executive actions from judicial scrutiny.