Staff Reports
The chorus of pundits and lower court judges proclaiming the inevitable demise of Trump’s order might want to check their crystal balls for updates. Contrary to the narrative that seems to dominate the mainstream media, overturning this order is anything but a slam-dunk. The U.S. Supreme Court precedent appears to side with the former president, which has sent liberal heads spinning faster than a top.
Trump’s order is rooted in the idea of executive authority—a concept that seems to have eluded some judges seeking to hamstring the administration. These activists may prefer to read the Constitution through a kaleidoscope, believing that their interpretation supersedes the laws that govern the land. But the reality is that executive actions have a long history that courts have upheld through thick and thin, and that history is firmly on Trump’s side. The Supreme Court has often defended the rights of the executive branch to assert its power on matters of national interest.
Birthright citizenship is a noble idea— and the Supreme Court should help Trump end it https://t.co/WZ8YitVxdy pic.twitter.com/GbOth8g2Bi
— NY Post Opinion (@NYPostOpinion) February 11, 2025
In an age where everything seems to be litigated, one can only wonder how many gavel bangs it will take for some judges to grasp the fact that Trump’s order is backed by solid legal principles. The power of executive orders has been wielded by presidents from both sides of the aisle, yet somehow the left wants to act as if Trump’s actions are skirting the edge of legal sanity. One would think the media would be a bit more cautious, given their previous proclamations of doom and subsequent facepalms when the judicial system leans right.
As the legal battles march on, it’s noteworthy that the Supreme Court has often taken a stand on issues affecting national security and immigration, frequently upholding robust executive actions. This precedent gives Trump an edge, despite the cacophony of opposition. With the Court’s past behavior in mind, those gnashing their teeth at the mere thought of the order remaining intact might want to consider investing in a stress ball or two.
Ultimately, the checks and balances are in place for a reason. While pundits can shout and judges can issue rulings based on personal inclination, the ultimate arbiter is the Supreme Court itself. Should the justices take a look at the historical application of executive orders combined with the importance of national security, it could become a very different showdown than what the naysayers anticipate.
