[[link removed]]
AS TRUMP STEAMROLLS WASHINGTON, COURTS FLEX THEIR POWER TO SLOW HIM
DOWN
[[link removed]]
Kyle Cheney
February 9, 2025
Politico
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]
_ Numerous federal district judges around the country have blocked
major portions of Trump’s early agenda — but Supreme Court
showdowns loom. _
Donald Trump’s legal strategy revolves around finding a sympathetic
audience at the Supreme Court: It has a six-justice conservative
supermajority, including three of Trump’s own appointees, by US
Department of State (Public Domain Mark 1.0)
President Donald Trump’s “shock and awe” assertion of executive
power has hit a wall in the courtroom — at least for now.
At least nine federal judges — from Washington, D.C., to Washington
state — have halted aspects of Trump’s early-term blitz, from his
effort to rewrite the Constitution’s birthright citizenship
guarantee to his sweeping effort to freeze federal spending to his
plans to break and remake the federal workforce.
That trend reached a crescendo Friday when U.S. District Judge Carl
Nichols — a Trump appointee — blocked a plan
[[link removed]] by
Trump and Elon Musk to put 2,200 USAID employees on leave, part of a
rapid-fire effort to dismantle the foreign aid agency. Hours later, a
federal judge in New York blocked Musk and his allies
[[link removed]]from
accessing sensitive Treasury records, citing a risk of improper
disclosure or hacking. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Paul
Engelmayer, an Obama appointee, was the most sweeping of its kind so
far.
Engelmayer’s ruling provoked a fury within Trump’s base, prompting
a call by Musk to impeach the judge and others who stand in Trump’s
way. Musk also reposted an account suggesting potential defiance of
the judge’s order. Meanwhile, Trump allies in Congress stoked the
furor further, with Sen. Mike Lee describing it as a “coup” and
Sen. Tom Cotton calling the judge an “outlaw.”
All the rulings so far are temporary: They prevent the policies from
taking effect while the courts consider the legal challenges more
fully. And looming over them all is the Supreme Court, which is almost
certain to have the final say on Trump’s extraordinary assertions of
executive power. Trump’s legal strategy revolves around finding a
sympathetic audience there: The high court has a six-justice
conservative supermajority, including three of Trump’s own
appointees.
But even if the wins for Trump’s adversaries are short-lived,
they’re accomplishing one thing: slowing down Trump’s effort to
project his administration as an unstoppable, invincible force able to
steamroll any impediments to his assertion of power.
As dozens of lawsuits challenging Trump’s early policies are rushing
through several strategically chosen federal district courts around
the country — and as a Republican-controlled Congress has shown
little interest in clashing with the leader of their party — these
courts have emerged as the only institutions with the power and the
will to check Trump’s onslaught.
In some cases, judges are voicing distress and even visceral fury as
they stand in Trump’s way.
“It has become ever more apparent that to our president, the rule of
law is but an impediment to his policy goals,” said U.S. District
Judge John Coughenour, a Seattle-based appointee of Ronald Reagan, as
he blocked Trump’s birthright citizenship policy
[[link removed]].
“The rule of law is, according to him, something to navigate around
or simply ignore.”
Though Coughenour spoke most forcefully, he hasn’t been alone. He,
Nichols, Engelmayer and at least six other federal judges appointed by
presidents of both parties have disrupted major portions of Trump’s
first-month agenda.
* U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan
[[link removed]],
a Joe Biden appointee in Washington, D.C., and U.S. District Judge
John McConnell
[[link removed]],
a Barack Obama appointee in Rhode Island, blocked Trump’s effort to
implement a blanket freeze on billions of dollars in federal spending.
* U.S. District Judge George O’ Toole
[[link removed]],
a Bill Clinton appointee in Massachusetts, halted a government-wide
program encouraging thousands of federal workers to resign.
* U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly
[[link removed]],
a Clinton appointee in Washington, D.C., coaxed an agreement to block
Treasury officials from sharing details of the government’s massive
payment system — accessed by allies of Musk — with anyone outside
the department.
* U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth
[[link removed]],
a Reagan appointee in Washington, D.C., blocked the implementation of
Trump’s order to transfer transgender women inmates to men’s
prisons.
* U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman
[[link removed]],
a Maryland-based Biden appointee, joined Coughenour in blocking
Trump’s birthright citizenship order.
* U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb
[[link removed]],
a Biden appointee in Washington, D.C., barred the Trump administration
from disclosing the names of FBI agents who worked on Jan. 6 cases —
without at least a two-day warning for the agents to come back to
court.
Coughenour’s stunning assessment of a sitting president was also a
stark contrast to the GOP-led Congress’ gentle compliance with
Trump’s efforts to dramatically expand the powers of his office.
Moves that have rattled the federal workforce and raised fears of a
sweeping retribution campaign against officials deemed disloyal to
Trump — particularly in the FBI and Justice Department — have been
largely met with shrugs from Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Those congressional Republicans appear content to let Trump — backed
by Musk, his roving “wood chipper”
[[link removed]] — steamroll
the federal bureaucracy
[[link removed]], purge
independent watchdogs
[[link removed]] and dismantle
federal agencies
[[link removed]] without
much pushback. Democrats, mired in the minority for the first time
since 2018, have proven largely toothless
[[link removed]] in
response, leaving their base frustrated.
That has left the courts, which have been flooded by lawsuits from
unions, nonprofits, state governments and other organizations affected
by the White House’s torrent of policy moves, as the lone check on
Trump.
It’s possible that all of these early decisions will be short-lived.
Trump is hopeful that the Supreme Court he helped tip sharply to the
right will side with him on matters of executive power. In one
landmark case, the court has already done just that: Last year, the
court announced a sweeping doctrine of presidential immunity
[[link removed]] that
helped Trump stave off federal criminal charges for subverting the
2020 election.
None of the cases his orders have triggered has yet reached the
appellate courts, let alone the Supreme Court. But as Trump’s
Justice Department begins to file appeals challenging the growing list
of injunctions, the cases could begin reaching the justices in the
coming weeks.
For now, the initial decisions to slow down the onslaught are having
widespread effects, forcing federal agencies to disclose more details
about their opaque plans for the workforce, establishing guidelines
for the handling of sensitive government data that Musk’s
“Department of Government Efficiency” has been gobbling up and
raising sharp questions about Trump’s effort to impound swaths of
government spending authorized by Congress.
The legal counterattack doesn’t appear likely to end anytime soon.
New lawsuits were filed Thursday and Friday, some taking on DOGE and
others taking on Trump’s orders restricting medical care for
transgender people and immigration tactics.
* Donald Trump
[[link removed]]
* Supreme Court
[[link removed]]
* DOGE
[[link removed]]
* SCOTUS
[[link removed]]
* Congress
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]
INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT
Submit via web
[[link removed]]
Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]
Twitter [[link removed]]
Facebook [[link removed]]
[link removed]
To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]
