Judicial Relief Clarification Act of 2025

Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Cesar E. Chavez and the Farmworker Movement National Historical Park Act. This bill would establish the Cesar E. Chavez and the Farmworker Movement National Historical Park in California and Arizona to preserve the nationally significant sites associated with Cesar Chavez and the farm worker movement.

Today, March 31, we celebrate Cesar Chavez Day, a day to honor and celebrate the life and legacy of the civil rights and labor leader whose impact reverberated throughout California and across the world. For Cesar Chavez, it did not matter where you came from or what your job was; he believed in your fundamental right to dignity and respect.

In 2008, with strong bipartisan support, Congress enacted legislation directing the National Park Service to conduct a special resource study of sites that are significant to the life of Cesar Chavez and the farm labor movement in the Western United States. The National Park Service evaluated over 100 sites and found that 5 sites were ``nationally significant''. Importantly, the Park Service wrote that these nationally significant sites depict a distinct and important aspect of American history associated with civil rights and labor movements that are not adequately represented or protected elsewhere. While the Park Service provided five management alternatives to protect these special places, they ultimately recommended that Congress establish a national historic park that would include several nationally significant sites.

In 2012, President Obama established the Cesar E. Chavez National Monument. While this action was a critical step forward, the national monument omits many nationally significant sites and leaves many important stories untold. The creation of a national historical park, as originally recommended by the Park Service, would allow the National Park Service to tell the full story of Cesar Chavez and the farm labor movement for the benefit of all Americans.

This legislation would also require the National Park Service to complete a National Historic Trail Study to determine the feasibility of creating the Farmworker Peregrinacion National Historic Trail. If ultimately designated, this trail would commemorate the 1966 Delano to Sacramento March, a major milestone event in the farm labor movement.

As the son of immigrants from Mexico and the first Latino to represent California in the U.S. Senate, I believe the movement Cesar Chavez created is as important today as it ever has been. The National Park System--which preserves our natural, historical, and cultural heritage while offering vital spaces for teaching, learning, and outdoor recreation--must paint the full

mosaic of America. Through the sites preserved by this bill, we will ensure that the National Park System preserves the diverse history of our Nation that is too often overlooked, ignored, or not represented.

I want to thank Congressman Ruiz for spearheading this effort with me to ensure that our national monuments and historical parks better reflect the diversity of America's heritage. I would also like to thank Senator Schiff for cosponsoring this legislation with me.

Today and every day, let's recommit to the work Cesar Chavez began. As he would say: ``La Lucha Sigue.'' We must not waver as we keep up the fight for justice and equality for all. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact the Cesar E. Chavez National Historical Park Act.

Mr. President, today, 20 of my colleagues and I will introduce legislation to stop the abuse of universal injunctions that we are seeing all across the country--all of this to stop the Trump agenda.

Universal injunctions violate the words of the Constitution that we agreed that the courts can only hear ``case or controversy.'' And that is a requirement of article III of the Constitution because they apply court orders to people not even parties to the lawsuits--so the necessity for doing away with universal injunctions violating the ``case-or-controversy'' requirements.

Universal injunctions were almost unheard of for the first 175 years of our history and only became common in the last decade. In addition to being unconstitutional, they are also anti-democratic. Universal injunctions have become a favorite tool of those seeking to obstruct President Trump's agenda.

Individual district judges who don't even have authority over any of the other 92 district courts are singlehandedly vetoing policies the American people elected President Trump to implement.

Now, universal injunctions have been used against both Democrat and Republican administrations since they have sprung up so numerously in the last few years.

But in the past 2 months alone, judges have issued more universal injunctions against the Trump administration than President Biden faced throughout his entire 4-year term.

By exercising power this way, the courts are doing great damage to the judicial process that they should be working to protect, and the Supreme

Court could stop this whole process, but the Supreme Court has not taken such action.

So it is Congress's job to legislate. So what would you expect? I am introducing legislation to solve this problem.

My bill prevents judges from providing nonparty relief, make temporary restraining orders immediately appealable, and reset the separation of powers. In short, I am trying to fix a bipartisan problem that has been plaguing both Democratic and Republican administrations alike.

Mr. President, today, 20 of my colleagues and I will introduce legislation to stop the abuse of universal injunctions that we are seeing all across the country--all of this to stop the Trump agenda.

Universal injunctions violate the words of the Constitution that we agreed that the courts can only hear ``case or controversy.'' And that is a requirement of article III of the Constitution because they apply court orders to people not even parties to the lawsuits--so the necessity for doing away with universal injunctions violating the ``case-or-controversy'' requirements.

Universal injunctions were almost unheard of for the first 175 years of our history and only became common in the last decade. In addition to being unconstitutional, they are also anti-democratic. Universal injunctions have become a favorite tool of those seeking to obstruct President Trump's agenda.

Individual district judges who don't even have authority over any of the other 92 district courts are singlehandedly vetoing policies the American people elected President Trump to implement.

Now, universal injunctions have been used against both Democrat and Republican administrations since they have sprung up so numerously in the last few years.

But in the past 2 months alone, judges have issued more universal injunctions against the Trump administration than President Biden faced throughout his entire 4-year term.

By exercising power this way, the courts are doing great damage to the judicial process that they should be working to protect, and the Supreme

Court could stop this whole process, but the Supreme Court has not taken such action.

So it is Congress's job to legislate. So what would you expect? I am introducing legislation to solve this problem.

My bill prevents judges from providing nonparty relief, make temporary restraining orders immediately appealable, and reset the separation of powers. In short, I am trying to fix a bipartisan problem that has been plaguing both Democratic and Republican administrations alike.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.