The House’s attempt to “rein in” federal judges will stall for the foreseeable future after a group of Republicans revolted against Speaker Johnson on Tuesday. Nine GOP lawmakers joined with all Democrats to kill a procedural measure following Mr. Johnson’s attempt to block absentee voting for new parents. 

The drama began in earnest on Monday, when members of the House Freedom Caucus twisted Mr. Johnson’s arm to kill Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna’s absentee voting rule. If it were adopted, Ms. Luna’s proposal would allow new parents to miss up to 12 weeks of votes by deputizing another member to vote on their behalf, which was the norm during the pandemic. 

Ms. Luna herself decided to leave the Freedom Caucus in protest of her colleagues’ machinations. “A small group among us threatened the Speaker, vowing to halt floor proceedings indefinitely — regardless of the legislation at stake, including President Trump’s agenda — unless he altered the rules to block my discharge petition,” the Florida congresswoman wrote in a letter Monday.

In turn, Ms. Luna banded together with eight other Republicans and all Democrats to kill Mr. Johnson’s legislative plan for the week. The procedural vote — known as a “rule” which allows for the consideration of legislative items — failed with just 206 members voting for it and 222 members voting against it. 

Shortly after the vote, House Republican leadership announced there would be no additional votes on the House floor this week, even as they are running up against their deadline to pass a budget resolution. 

“A handful of Republicans joined with all the Democrats to take down a rule. That’s rarely done. It’s very unfortunate in this case,” Mr. Johnson told reporters just off the House floor on Tuesday. “That rule being brought down means that we can’t have any further action on the floor this week.”

“We will not be voting on the rogue judges [bill] who are attacking President Trump’s agenda,” the speaker announced. “All that was just wiped off the table.”

The president has been demanding for weeks that Congress do something to keep federal district court judges from issuing restraining orders that block his administration from exacting policy priorities. His mass firings, his withholding of federal funds, his revoking of temporary protected status for Venezuelan migrants, and his mass deportation plans have all run into challenges in the judiciary that have caused Mr. Trump to lash out. 

“STOP NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS NOW, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. If Justice Roberts and the United States Supreme Court do not fix this toxic and unprecedented situation IMMEDIATELY, our Country is in very serious trouble!” the president wrote on Truth Social in March.  

The House Judiciary Committee has already advanced a piece of legislation — the No Rogue Rulings Act — which would do exactly what Mr. Trump is demanding. 

The bill states that “no United States district court shall issue any order providing for injunctive relief, except in the case of such an order that is applicable only to limit the actions of a party to the case before such district court with respect to the party seeking injunctive relief from such district court.”

At a hearing on Tuesday, House Republicans questioned Speaker Gingrich, a legal scholar from the Heritage Foundation, and a woman who was forced from her home by a migrant gang about the effects of these kinds of nationwide injunctions that limit the president’s power to deport migrants. 

“The president’s authority is at its zenith when we’re talking about his actions as commander-in-chief. Injunctions and temporary restraining orders halting presidential actions nationwide threaten a key feature of our Constitutional architecture, undermining the core premise of unity in the executive branch — the unitary executive, as we refer to it,” Congressman Chip Roy, the chairman of the one of the subcommittees that ran Tuesday’s hearing, said.