Trump-backed bills on activist judges, non-citizen voting heading for House-wide votes

Fox News - Apr 8th, 2025

The House GOP is advancing two critical bills aimed at restricting federal judges and mandating proof of citizenship to vote, both backed by President Donald Trump. The No Rogue Rulings Act (NORRA Act), introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa, seeks to curb district court judges from issuing nationwide orders that block Trump's policies. Meanwhile, the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act from Rep. Chip Roy aims to enforce citizenship verification in the voter registration process. These bills are expected to be voted on this week, following a procedural 'rule vote' that combines them with two financial regulatory measures. Despite recent procedural delays, both measures are poised to pass the House without much opposition.

The broader implications of these bills are significant, as they represent ongoing efforts by Trump's allies to solidify his policy agenda and address perceived judicial overreach. These developments come amidst a backdrop of internal GOP tensions, highlighted by recent disputes over proxy voting for new parents in Congress. While passage in the House seems likely, these bills face an uncertain future in the Senate, where bipartisan support is necessary to overcome the 60-vote threshold. The outcome could impact the legislative landscape significantly, especially in terms of judicial power and voting rights, key issues in the current political discourse.

Donald Trump House Gop Chip Roy Darrell Issa No Rogue Rulings Act Federal Judges Voter Citizenship Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility Act House Rules Committee

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a timely and informative overview of two significant legislative efforts in the U.S. House of Representatives, focusing on bills backed by President Donald Trump. It effectively outlines the procedural aspects and political context, making it accessible to readers interested in current political developments. However, the article could benefit from a more balanced presentation of perspectives, including detailed arguments from both supporters and opponents of the bills. Additionally, incorporating a wider range of sources and providing more in-depth analysis of the potential impacts and legal challenges would enhance the article's credibility and engagement. Overall, the article succeeds in highlighting important legislative issues but could improve its depth and balance to offer a more comprehensive understanding of the topics discussed.

Accuracy

The article presents factual claims that align with known legislative processes and the political context surrounding the bills discussed. The claims about the No Rogue Rulings Act (NORRA Act) and the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act are supported by verifiable information, such as the bills' sponsors and their intended purposes. However, the article could provide more detail on the potential constitutional challenges to the NORRA Act and the specific impacts of the SAVE Act on voter eligibility, particularly regarding the claim that it could disenfranchise women who have changed their last names.

Balance

The article primarily presents the Republican perspective, focusing on the legislative efforts supported by President Donald Trump and his allies. There is a brief mention of Democratic opposition, particularly concerning the proxy voting issue and the potential disenfranchisement caused by the SAVE Act. However, the article could benefit from more comprehensive coverage of opposing viewpoints, including detailed Democratic arguments against the bills and potential legal and ethical concerns.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, with a logical flow that guides readers through the legislative process and political context. The use of subheadings and quotes from political figures helps break down complex information. However, it could improve clarity by providing more background on the implications of the bills and the potential legal challenges they may face, which would help readers fully grasp the significance of the legislative efforts.

Source quality

The article relies on statements from key political figures, such as House Rules Committee Chair Virginia Foxx and Rep. Jim McGovern, which adds credibility to the reporting. However, it primarily uses information from Fox News, which may introduce bias. Including a broader range of sources, such as independent legal experts or non-partisan organizations, could enhance the article's reliability and provide a more balanced view of the legislative proposals.

Transparency

The article provides a clear outline of the legislative process and the political context, including procedural details like the rule vote. However, it lacks transparency regarding potential conflicts of interest or the methodology used to gather information. Additional context on how the bills align with broader political strategies or historical legislative efforts would improve transparency and help readers understand the motivations behind the proposals.