With Republicans in control of two branches of government, the guardrails will be left to the third branch, the judiciary, if any guardrails there will be. The judiciary, as a whole, and the Supreme Court, in particular, have not always acquiesced to the unconstitutional and capricious acts of the president, whether it involved a Muslim ban or forgiveness of student loan debt.
Then again, it has issued rulings such as Dobbs and United States v. Trump that give rise to serious doubt that it is willing to stand up against the overreaching or downright idiocy of whatever whim pops into Darth Cheetos’ head. The MAGA fanbase is of the view that elections have consequences, and the public has spoken. But the courts, at least theoretically, are not popular institutions and do not make decisions based on the transient desires of the public. Can, and will, the judiciary hold?
The court impeded Mr. Trump’s initial efforts to ban people from six Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. It blocked Mr. Trump’s attempt to put a question on the 2020 census asking whether the respondent was a U.S. citizen. It rejected his effort to rescind the program that shields people brought to the United States as children from deportation and allows them to work. It ruled against him in a high-profile subpoena dispute. And it sat on its hands as Mr. Trump and his supporters tried to use the legal process to challenge the results of the 2020 election.
So despite fears to the contrary, the judiciary is not a rubber stamp of Trump’s will?
The problem for the court — and for the Republic — is that it’s going to be much harder for the justices to push back this time around, even if they want to. That is because of the sharp decline in public support for the court, which has plummeted, no doubt in response not just to the justices’ controversial rulings, but also to the ethically questionable behavior of some of them. Without that public support, what would happen if Mr. Trump simply ignored a decision by the nation’s highest court that he doesn’t like? It is a question that until now seemed largely thinkable.
Ironically, the Democrats have spent the past four years doing everything in their power to undermine public respect for the judiciary. Sure, the Republicans have hardly been pure either, attacking the legal system when Trump or J6 insurrectionists were in the dock, while otherwise adoring it when it served their convenience. Yet it was the Dems, with their court-packing plan, their term limits, their grievances against Trump judges and their call to fill seats with judges for the very purpose of establishing an opposite bias of Trump judges, that have done the most to undermine respect for the courts.
Have you never read the hysterics of Linda Greenhouse in the New York Times? Do you not wonder why nearly everyone on the left believes, as an article of faith, that the Supreme Court is merely another arm of the Trump machine, doing the bidding of a wannabe demagogue?
Although the Supreme Court’s formal power comes from Article III of the U.S. Constitution, its real power comes from public support for the court as an institution. The court depends upon the elected branches for everything from its budget to its building to its calendar and its statutory authority to hear almost all of the cases that it decides.
When the left did everything in its power to undermine public support, it was no doubt under the belief that they would hold the other branches of government, leaving only the evil SCOTUS majority to foil in order to achieve its ends. That looks like a pretty silly belief now, and their tactic of attacking the court’s legitimacy seems pretty likely to bite them in their woke butt.
But public support for the institution is merely one part of the necessary guardrail.
Yet the vice president-elect, JD Vance, suggested such a scenario in a 2021 interview in which he first said Mr. Trump should fire “every civil servant in the administrative state” and “replace them with our people.” And then he added: “When the courts stop you, stand before the country like Andrew Jackson did and say the chief justice has made his ruling, now let him enforce it.”
Up to now, the Executive and Legislative branches of government have largely abided the rulings of the Supreme Court. Whether that was due to public support for its rulings, or some sense that ignoring the Court was the pivot point between a republic and a dictatorship, the courts held. But with the court hold this time? Will the courts be willing to tell Trump “no” when he indulges in whatever bit of unconstitutional idiocy pops into his head? Will Trump take “no” for an answer?
*Tuesday Talk rules apply.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Up to now, the Executive and Legislative branches of government have largely abided the rulings of the Supreme Court.”
It’s unlikely that Trump will openly defy the Supreme Court Andrew Jackson style. It’s more likely that he will follow the president set by the withered husk of Joe Biden, when he continued implementing his vote-buying Student Loan scheme after the court struck it down. His lawyers claimed that some minor tinkering with the eligibility requirements put his actions outside the conduct that had been barred by the court, but Biden’s broken brain farted out the truth at one point.
“The Supreme Court blocked it,” Mr. Biden added, “but that didn’t stop me.”
An upside of the last week is the long-overdue torching of Biden’s reputation, and it would be preferable for universities to take the soaking rather than taxpayers, but that quote works better when it stops before his following words: “…I announced we’re going to pursue alternative paths.”
“When the left did everything in its power to undermine public support, it was no doubt under the belief that they would hold the other branches of government, leaving only the evil SCOTUS majority to foil in order to achieve its ends.”
This has become the hallmark of the left. Harry Reid eliminating the filibuster on judges, then talk of eliminating the filibuster in the Senate altogether, now delegitimizing SCOTUS just when they need it most.
I’d swear they get their plans from ACME, just like Wile E. Coyote.
Well, I guess we’re going to find out. The Democrats, always learning their lessons a day late, will pay the price now for undermining the courts.
To the extent the pattern of nationwide injunctive actions in individual district courts persists, we should get an early indication by how Trump responds to the first adverse district court injunction.
It’s possible that in many (most? all?) instances the federal judiciary may be irrelevant. Because Trump has both immunity and the power to pardon anyone that he directs to commit criminal acts on his behalf. And the power to fire them if they don’t commit crime on his behalf.
In fact, how does a court jail someone for contempt if the POTUS gives them a pardon for the contempt?
We will see all kinds of brand new ways that the constitutional requirement that the POTUS take care that the laws be faithfully executed is ignored.
Nonsense. IANAL but even I know that this is a pretty severe misinterpretation of TRUMP v. UNITED STATES.
That being said, I do hope and expect that Trump will use the precedent set by “Biden” to close the border and deport many illegals posthaste, and to ignore or end-run the pronouncements of lawfaring judges who order him to stop. Likewise, I hope and expect that he will use the overturning of “Chevron” to eviscerate federal regulations, and then fire huge hordes of bureaucrats who used to enforce those useless and harmful regulations, and that he will ignore or end-run the accompanying hysterical shrieks of nutjob liberal judges throughout the land.
If such powers were imbued to the president by the Supreme Court it is hard to imagine why Biden/Harris did not have Trump killed (please offer a character based reason, I need a good laugh today).
Trump relies on the courts often which has mostly been a good strategy for him to date. Has he ignored a court order (other than of the gag variety)? Why would he undermine an ally?
The Republicans now have majorities in both houses of Congress. But these are by no means supermajorities. I doubt Congress will give Trump everything he wants. He will get a lot, but not everything and it will be interesting to see how long it takes for these majorities to start to fracture.
I also don’t think the Supreme Court will give him everything either. That’s the beauty of life-time appointment. Most justices are loyal to the institution and not to the politicians who come and go–even those politicians of their own political party.
But I’m an optimist.