A battle looms over rule of law as some courts start to flex their muscles against Trump

The US supreme court and other federal courts have begun flexing their muscles to push back on Donald Trump's efforts to defy judicial orders, escalating a hugely consequential battle over the rule of law.
The US issued a significant order early Saturday morning blocking the federal government from removing people who had been detained in northern Texas from the United States. Separately, US district judge James Boasberg has found probable cause to hold the government in contempt for defying his orders to halt deportations.
In another case, the US district judge Paula Xinis has forced the government to provide daily updates in its efforts to comply with court orders to 'facilitate' the return of Kilmar Ábrego García – the man who was wrongly deported to El Salvador.
It is a dynamic that underscores how a constitutional crisis between Trump and the courts is likely to be a push and pull between the government and judges that is simmering through the legal system and could very well break it.
'The president is testing how much the judiciary still meaningfully constrains him,' Ben Ratersdorf, a policy associate at the watchdog group 'Protect Democracy' wrote in a blog post titled 'there is no rubicon'.
Whether the courts can force compliance with their orders is an essential question for American democracy, where a pillar of the rule of law is the willingness of litigants to accept court rulings, especially the ones they disagree with.
'The quality of judicial independence that federal judges have enjoyed throughout most of our history has depended much more on norms than it has on rules,' said Stephen Burbank, a professor emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania. 'Of course, a major concern from that perspective is that Trump pays no attention to norms.'
In its Saturday ruling, the supreme court temporarily blocked the administration from deporting people being held in a detention center in Anson, Texas, under the Alien Enemies Act (Aea).
At the beginning of April, the supreme court had allowed Aea deportations to move forward as long as migrants received adequate notice they were being deported under the law. 'The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually' challenge their deportation prior to it occurring, the supreme court said.
But in filings last week, lawyers for detainees challenging the Texas deportations told the US supreme court their clients were being presented with English-only notices informing them they were being deported under the Aea, but no information about how to challenge it.
In an extraordinary move, the US supreme court issued a decision temporarily halting the deportations before a lower court, the US court of appeals for the fifth circuit, had even ruled on the matter. The court moved to intervene quickly even though a government lawyer had said in a hearing in a related case on Friday that there were no plans for planes to take off that day.
'In a world in which a majority of the justices were willing to take these kinds of representations at face value, there might've been no need to intervene overnight Friday evening; the justices could've taken at least some of Saturday to try to sort things out before handing down their decision,' Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown, wrote in his Substack newsletter 'One First.' 'This may seem like a technical point, but it underscores how seriously the court, or at least a majority of it, took the urgency of the matter.'
However significant, the US supreme court's ruling is only temporary and the government is likely to ask it to lift it and resume the deportations. The court's response is likely to set off the next round of its fight with Trump. Some conservative voices, including Sean Davis, CEO of the Federalist, and Trump ally Mike Davis, have already started attacking the justices on the court.
'If the Supreme Court is going to ignore the law and the Constitution, then the president is obligated to ignore the Supreme Court and put it in its place,' Sean Davis said in a post on X on Saturday. 'When we're done deporting illegals, it's time to start deporting rogue judges,' he wrote in another post.
'Let's hope our Supreme Court justices get their heads out of their asses. They wear robes, not capes,' Mike Davis, who runs the Article III project, a conservative group focused on the courts, wrote on X.
Outside of the supreme court, Judge Boasberg laid out a series of escalating actions he could take to punish the Trump officials (an appellate court has paused the contempt process while the Trump administration appeals).
In the case before Judge Xinis, the administration seems to be doing whatever it can not to comply with orders that it 'facilitate Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.' On 10 April, Xinis ordered the government to take 'all available steps to facilitate the return of Ábrego García to the United States as soon as possible.' Deploying one of her judicial tools, she ordered the government to provide daily updates to her on what it was doing to comply with that order. When the government made it clear it was doing nothing to comply, she ordered government officials to respond to written questions from the plaintiffs and for key officials to sit for depositions. Lawyers for the plaintiffs said in a court filing on Tuesday that the government was essentially ignoring that order as well.
The Trump administration appealed Judge Xinis's 10 April order to the US court of appeals for the fourth circuit. A panel of judges on the circuit denied the administration's request to halt the lower court's rulings. And in a striking opinion, Judge Harvie Wilkinson, a Ronald Reagan appointee once considered a top contender for the supreme court, warned of all the damage that could come if the executive branch continued to defy the judiciary.
'Now the branches come too close to grinding irrevocably against one another in a conflict that promises to diminish both. This is a losing proposition all around,' Wilkinson wrote. 'The judiciary will lose much from the constant intimations of its illegitimacy, to which by dent of custom and detachment we can only sparingly reply. The executive will lose much from a public perception of its lawlessness and all of its attendant contagions.
'The executive may succeed for a time in weakening the courts, but over time history will script the tragic gap between what was and all that might have been, and law in time will sign its epitaph.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Scottish Sun

14 minutes ago

• Scottish Sun

Trump calls for ‘regime change' to ‘make Iran great again' after ‘monumental' nuke blitz as Tehran vows to revenge

DON'S MIGA CALL Trump calls for 'regime change' to 'make Iran great again' after 'monumental' nuke blitz as Tehran vows to revenge Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) DONALD Trump has floated the idea of a regime change in Tehran to "Make Iran Great Again" after bombing the Islamic Republic. Less than a day after the US military blitzed three key facilities central to the Iranians' nuclear ambitions, Trump hinted that the Mullahs' regime could well be toppled. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 4 United States President Donald J Trump addressed the nation after bombing Iran Credit: AP 4 Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei could be toppled, Trump suggested 4 Crowds holding Iranian flags gather in the Revolution Square in the capital Credit: Getty 4 Inspired by his Make America Great Again (MAGA) political movement, the president called for "Make Iran Great Again" (MIGA) - and hinted that the autocratic Ayatollah Ali Khamenei could be ousted. Trump wrote on Truth Social: "It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!" Trump's post came despite his MAGA administration repeatedly saying the US is not looking for a regime change in Iran. Though the Israelis have expressed great interest in toppling the top Islamist leadership in Tehran, something they think would bring peace in the Middle East. Trump's No2 JD Vance yesterday said that the administration's view "has been very clear that we don't want a regime change." He told NBC's Meet The Press: "We do not want to protract this or build this out any more than it's already been built out. We want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement here." Speaking of the US bombings in Iran, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said: "This mission was not and has not been about regime change." Trump last night hailed the US military bombing on Iran's key nuclear facilities, saying the strikes "obliterated" Tehran's doomsday program. He said that the US military took the "bomb out of Iran's hands" and caused "monumental" damage to Tehran's nuclear ambitions. But the Islamic Republic - hurt and wounded - has vowed to retaliate by striking US targets in the Middle East. Tehran retaliated to the US bombing by approving steps to close the Strait of Hormuz - a bottleneck entrance to the Gulf where nearly a quarter of the oil shipped around the world passes through narrow waters. Attempting to choke off Gulf oil by closing the strait could send global oil prices skyrocketing and derail the world economy. It would also invite an almost certain conflict with the US Navy's massive Fifth Fleet based in the Gulf, which is tasked with keeping it open. Meanwhile, Ali Akbar Velayati, an advisor to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said bases used by US forces could be attacked in retaliation. 'Any country in the region or elsewhere that is used by American forces to strike Iran will be considered a legitimate target for our armed forces,' he said in a message carried by the official IRNA news agency. 'America has attacked the heart of the Islamic world and must await irreparable consequences.' Tehran has so far not followed through on its threats of retaliation against the US - either by targeting its military bases or trying to choke off global oil supplies. But that may not hold up. Trump warned that further action could be taken if Tehran doesn't agree to an adequate peace deal, or tries to harm American interests. He said in a nationally televised speech at the White House: "Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier." "There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days." Stay up to date with the latest on Israel vs Iran with The Sun's live blog below...

Telegraph

21 minutes ago

• Telegraph

Trump agitates for regime change to ‘make Iran great again'

Donald Trump has appeared to agitate for new leadership in Iran. The US president on Sunday suggested a 'regime change' would take place if its leaders were 'unable to make Iran great again'. His comments came just hours after vice president JD Vance and defence secretary Pete Hegseth stressed that Washington was not seeking to topple the Iranian government following US air strikes on its nuclear facilities this weekend. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change?' Mr Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. Referencing his 'Maga' (Make America Great Again) movement, he added: 'MIGA!!!' Since striking Iran in the early hours of Sunday, Mr Trump has pressed the country not to retaliate and urged it to return to the negotiating table immediately. At a press conference at the Pentagon on Sunday morning, Mr Hegseth declared: 'This mission was not, has not been, about regime change.' 'We don't want a regime change,' Mr Vance said a short time later. 'We do not want to protract this.' He added: 'We want to end the nuclear program, and then we want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement here.' Senior US officials have warned that forcing out Iran's government would leave a power vacuum and result in another protracted American war in the Middle East. Danny Danon, Israel's ambassador to the UN, said on Sunday that Israel would like to see regime change in Iran but would not seek to engineer it. 'That's for the Iranian people to decide, not us,' he said. Also on Sunday, John Bolton, Mr Trump's former national security adviser, claimed Iran was 'on the verge' of regime change following the US attacks and said the president would be forced to use 'brutal force' if Tehran retaliated. Mr Trump previously vetoed an Israeli plan to kill Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, American officials revealed last week. In the early hours of Sunday the US launched strikes on Iran, hitting three nuclear bases at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Mr Trump described the action as 'a spectacular military success' that had 'completely and totally obliterated' Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities. He said in an earlier Truth Social post: 'We had a spectacular military success yesterday, taking the 'bomb' right out of their hands (and they would use it if they could!) but, as usual, and despite all of the praise and accolades received, this 'lightweight' Congressman is against what was so brilliantly achieved last night.' Israeli officials on Sunday said they believe Iran's heavily-fortified nuclear site at Fordow sustained serious damage from the strikes but had not been completely destroyed. A US official told the New York Times it had been taken 'off the table'. Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, issued a more conservative assessment than the president on Sunday. He said Iran's nuclear capabilities had been 'degraded' and 'set back from a technical standpoint', but stopped short of saying they had been outright destroyed. On Sunday, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, claimed Israel was 'close' to wiping out Iran's nuclear programme and ballistic missiles. He vowed not to be dragged into a 'war of attrition with Iran', saying: 'When we achieve our objectives, the fighting will stop.'

The Guardian

35 minutes ago

• The Guardian

US-Iran crisis: what we know so far

US president Donald Trump has brought up the possibility of regime change in Iran following US military strikes against three of its key nuclear enrichment sites over the weekend, even as top members of his administration insisted the US was not seeking to topple the Iranian leadership. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Trump wrote in a post on his social media platform Truth Social. Vice-president JD Vance had insisted the US was 'not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear programme' while US secretary of state Marco Rubio said that that the US was 'not looking for war in Iran'. The US state department has issued a 'worldwide caution' for Americans, saying the conflict between Israel and Iran could put those travelling or living abroad at an increased security risk. World leaders are now awaiting Iran's response to the US attacks. Iran's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, told France's Emmanuel Macron: 'The Americans must receive a response to their aggression.' Speaking in Istanbul, Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araqchi said his country would consider all possible responses. 'The US showed they have no respect for international law. They only understand the language of threat and force,' he said. He later flew to Moscow to discuss 'common threats' with President Vladimir Putin on Monday. Iran's parliament has reportedly approved the closing of the key strait of Hormuz shipping lane. Reuters reported Iran's supreme national security council will make the final decision on the move, which could hamstring global trade by shutting the narrow passage between Iran and Oman. US secretary of state Marco Rubio urged China to advise Tehran against closing the vital trade route, telling Fox News: 'I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that, because they heavily depend on the strait of Hormuz for their oil. If they do that, it will be another terrible mistake.' Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel is very close to meeting its goals in Iran of removing the threats of ballistic missiles and the nuclear programme. Speaking to Israeli reporters, he said: 'We won't pursue our actions beyond what is needed to achieve them, but we also won't finish too soon. When the objectives are achieved, then the operation is complete and the fighting will stop.' A social media account associated with Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, later said Israel has made a 'grave mistake' and 'must be punished and is being punished'. The UK, France and Germany released a joint statement after the US strikes, calling upon Iran to engage in negotiations leading to agreement that addresses all concerns associated with its nuclear program. The three countries also urged Iran 'not to take any further action that could destabilise the region', adding: 'We have consistently been clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon and can no longer pose a threat to regional security.' Iran's health ministry said the US strikes had wounded an unspecified number of people but that none 'showed any signs of radioactive contamination'. 'For years, the ministry of health has set up nuclear emergency units in the nearest medical facilities to nuclear sites,' ministry spokesperson Hossein Kermanpour said on X. Israel said its fighter jets had struck 'dozens' of targets across Iran on Sunday, including a long-range missile site in Yazd in the centre of the country for the first time, Agence France Presse reported. A military statement said that 'approximately 30 IAF [air force] fighter jets struck dozens of military targets throughout Iran' – including 'the 'Imam Hussein' strategic missile command center in the Yazd area, where long-range Khorramshahr missiles were stored'. US secretary of state Marco Rubio said that 'there are no planned military operations right now against Iran.' In a new interview with CBS, Rubio added that 'no one will know for days' whether Iran had moved some of its nuclear materials prior to the strikes. Pete Hegseth, the US secretary of defence, said the impact of the airstrikes was still being assessed, but that the bombing had hit the areas that had been identified in the planning of the operation. Hegseth said: 'The battle damage assessment is ongoing, but our initial assessment as the chairman said is that all of our precision munitions struck where we wanted them to strike, and had the desired effect.'