Staff Reports
President Donald Trump continues to navigate a legal minefield that seems rigged against him, especially since his accident-prone entry into office. The early signs of this troublesome terrain include a laundry list of high-profile executive actions that have been thwarted by federal judges eager to play their part as gatekeepers of all things Biden-approved. In what could only be described as a minor victory amidst a storm of judicial roadblocks, a D.C. judge decided to toss out an ACLU ploy intended to restore a Biden-era migrant parole program that was relying heavily on that perfectly unhelpful CBP One app. Apparently, trying to fix a car with a rubber chicken does have its limits.
The list of legal defeats is starting to resemble a sad trophy case in which the trophies are actually old shoes. Trump’s proposals to limit birthright citizenship have been met with brick walls, while his attempts to publicly identify FBI agents involved in the January 6th situations have been slapped back as well. Toss in some judges putting the brakes on suspending government assistance grants and blocking plans for a federal workforce buyout, and it’s clear that the judiciary has become a daunting obstacle course for those trying to make progress in Trump’s America.
At least nine federal judges have halted aspects of Trump’s early-term blitz — from his effort to rewrite the Constitution’s birthright citizenship guarantee to his effort to freeze federal spending to his plans to break and remake the federal workforce. https://t.co/WwxOGe1v2w
— Jon Cooper 🇺🇸 (@joncoopertweets) February 9, 2025
Judges are not just blocking moves; they’re throwing shade. For example, a particular U.S. District Judge, who apparently fancies himself a legal philosopher, took it upon himself to critique Trump’s approach to governance, suggesting that the president treats the rule of law as an optional accessory instead of a hard and fast rule. According to this judge, Trump seems to operate under the belief that rules are there to be bent or ignored altogether and that this approach is detrimental to both public policy and personal integrity. Sorry, Your Honor, but in the eyes of many conservatives, that sounds suspiciously like enforcing a “Do as I say, not as I do” philosophy that’s often more characteristic of the left.
As frustration mounts among Republicans, some are fast tracking plans to introduce legislation targeting what they deem “rogue judges” who feel empowered to dictate policy from the bench. Representative Darrell Issa seems to be leading the charge, aiming to rein in what many perceive as judicial tyranny. Meanwhile, in a move that could only be described as a bold play, Elon Musk, who ironically also oversees the Department of Government Efficiency, is calling for the impeachment of a judge who dared to disagree with his department’s whims. Thus, the plot thickens as the judicial and executive branches square off.
From a legal standpoint, some experts suggest that Trump’s actions reflect a belief in the unitary executive theory, which champions presidential authority over the operations of the executive branch. However, not all legal eagles are buying what Trump is selling. A Georgetown law professor has weighed in, suggesting that the president has seemingly pushed this theory past its breaking point. If the predictions hold true, continued legal setbacks appear to be in store, leaving many conservatives wondering whether the real obstacle is a few “rogue judges” or an entire judicial system out for an all-out resist Trump campaign.
