MAGA Mike Johnson

Well, let me start off by saying that judges need to follow the law. And I don't think this country needs another impeachment charade. That's what we saw in the last Congress, and I voted no on that for a reason. Judges need to follow the law as well.

And, you know, what I think is important about the bill we just passed is we have a number of judges who have been activist judges and going beyond the scope of their district courts. And if you look at Congress's law, the laws that are on the books and Congress's role there, judges need to be following federal civil procedure.

And, you know, what I think is important about the bill we just passed is we have a number of judges who have been activist judges and going beyond the scope of their district courts. And if you look at Congress's law, the laws that are on the books and Congress's role there, judges need to be following federal civil procedure.

And, you know, what I think is important about the bill we just passed is we have a number of judges who have been activist judges and going beyond the scope of their district courts. And if you look at Congress's law, the laws that are on the books and Congress's role there, judges need to be following federal civil procedure.

So our bill includes a provision that would make sure that they follow things like rule number 65, which is what we've seen egregious abuses of by some of these judges recently. We have a bill called the Rogue Rulings Act, which would help to, again, reel this in. If someone is suing in a district court, they should be provided relief in that district court. It's not a nationwide court decision.

So our bill includes a provision that would make sure that they follow things like rule number 65, which is what we've seen egregious abuses of by some of these judges recently. We have a bill called the Rogue Rulings Act, which would help to, again, reel this in. If someone is suing in a district court, they should be provided relief in that district court. It's not a nationwide court decision.

So our bill includes a provision that would make sure that they follow things like rule number 65, which is what we've seen egregious abuses of by some of these judges recently. We have a bill called the Rogue Rulings Act, which would help to, again, reel this in. If someone is suing in a district court, they should be provided relief in that district court. It's not a nationwide court decision.

It is a district court decision. And that is designed on purpose within our system. And so judges need to be following that law as well. As far as the checks and balances, Congress is executing its right to do that. We are using what's called the Congressional Review Act authority. We've used that in many cases.

It is a district court decision. And that is designed on purpose within our system. And so judges need to be following that law as well. As far as the checks and balances, Congress is executing its right to do that. We are using what's called the Congressional Review Act authority. We've used that in many cases.

It is a district court decision. And that is designed on purpose within our system. And so judges need to be following that law as well. As far as the checks and balances, Congress is executing its right to do that. We are using what's called the Congressional Review Act authority. We've used that in many cases.

Already this Congress, when we don't like a rule or regulation introduced by an administration, Congress can use the CRA to do that. These votes, many of them have been bipartisan, and we have done that several times on rules that I think take our country in the wrong direction. Many of them are from the previous administration, but I don't care who's president.

Already this Congress, when we don't like a rule or regulation introduced by an administration, Congress can use the CRA to do that. These votes, many of them have been bipartisan, and we have done that several times on rules that I think take our country in the wrong direction. Many of them are from the previous administration, but I don't care who's president.

Already this Congress, when we don't like a rule or regulation introduced by an administration, Congress can use the CRA to do that. These votes, many of them have been bipartisan, and we have done that several times on rules that I think take our country in the wrong direction. Many of them are from the previous administration, but I don't care who's president.

I'm willing to work with anyone to, again, make sure that we're respecting American citizens again. And 77 million Americans voted to make sure we are advancing these priorities. So thank you again for coming. We are out of time because I've got to get going to another stop in the district.

I'm willing to work with anyone to, again, make sure that we're respecting American citizens again. And 77 million Americans voted to make sure we are advancing these priorities. So thank you again for coming. We are out of time because I've got to get going to another stop in the district.

I'm willing to work with anyone to, again, make sure that we're respecting American citizens again. And 77 million Americans voted to make sure we are advancing these priorities. So thank you again for coming. We are out of time because I've got to get going to another stop in the district.

Well, what we do with this bill is we prevent that from happening, but what we don't take out.

Well, what we do with this bill is we prevent that from happening, but what we don't take out.

Well, what we do with this bill is we prevent that from happening, but what we don't take out.

for this purpose, no, I cannot.