President Donald Trump, during his second term, has been facing a barrage of legal challenges. He mentioned on February 11 that while he plans to respect court decisions that block his policies, he will also be appealing them, hoping for reversals from higher courts.
“I always abide by the courts… and we’ll appeal, but appeals take a long time,” Trump stated while addressing the press from the Oval Office.
Lawsuits have been popping up left and right against Trump’s administration, leading to multiple judicial orders that halt some of his plans.
Notably, three federal judges have put a stop to his efforts to limit birthright citizenship. Other legal challenges have arisen from his attempts to freeze federal spending and offer buyouts to federal employees, among other initiatives.
The Department of Justice under Trump has been busy filing appeals in response to these court orders, including cases related to birthright citizenship. They’ve taken their fight to the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Fourth Circuit on this issue.
Additionally, they filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit concerning the firing of the former head of the Office of Special Counsel, Hampton Dellinger.
A judge’s order blocking the administration’s spending freeze has also been contested by the DOJ. Trump is clearly concerned that these judicial blocks could allow corrupt activities within the government to persist. “It gives crooked people more time to cover up the books,” he remarked, emphasizing his hope that judges will help curb corrupt spending.
Trump suggested that if corruption is evident, judges should act to prevent taxpayers’ money from being misused. “If you go into a judge and you show them, here’s a corrupt situation… I would hope a judge would say, ‘Don’t send it, give it back to the taxpayer,’” he added. However, at least two federal judges have issued orders blocking the administration’s attempts to freeze spending, including one from Rhode Island District Judge John McConnell.
Judge McConnell has even enforced a restraining order, asserting that the administration violated it by improperly freezing federal funds. “The States have presented evidence… that the Defendants… have continued to improperly freeze federal funds,” McConnell said. He clarified that these freezes stemmed from a broad order rather than any specific fraud findings.
The administration, not taking these rulings lightly, has requested a stay on McConnell’s enforcement order in the 1st Circuit. They argue that a single district court judge should not have the power to control federal spending, suggesting it breaches the Constitution’s separation of powers. Though the appeals court did not immediately pause the order, they allowed the administration to file more paperwork by February 13.
Legal experts speculate that some of these lawsuits could escalate to the Supreme Court, potentially shaping the future boundaries of executive power. “He’s testing to see what works and what doesn’t,” noted former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani.
The case involving the firing of the former chair of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) may lead to the court revisiting historical precedents.
The NLRB lawsuit might push the Supreme Court to reconsider Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, a decision from 1935 that limits presidential power in removing certain officials.
Catholic University Law Professor J. Joel Alicea commented that this case could reach the Supreme Court and challenge the standing of Humphrey’s Executor. Overturning this precedent would significantly alter the functioning of American government.
In the midst of these legal battles, Trump seems determined to push forward with his agenda despite opposition. His administration’s actions and the resulting legal challenges underscore the ongoing tensions between different branches of government. The outcomes of these cases could indeed have lasting impacts on executive authority in the United States.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login