NY Times Essay Notes That Trump Isn’t the One Defying the Supreme Court
“Now the defiance is coming from inside the judicial branch itself, in the form of a lower-court mutiny against the Supreme Court.”
Adrian Vermeule teaches at Harvard Law School and makes some excellent points here.
I’m amazed this was published in the NY Times:
Someone Is Defying the Supreme Court, but It Isn’t Trump
Since President Trump returned to the presidency for a second term, legal scholars and political writers have wrestled with a particular preoccupation: What if he defies court orders?
When actual examples of the administration violating court orders turned out to be hard to find, and contestable in any given case, some commentators broadened the notion of defiance to include so-called malicious compliance (or legalistic noncompliance). The idea here is that even if the president or his agents did comply with the terms of court orders, however unreasonable, they might be doing so in bad faith, with the covert motive of actually evading or circumventing the point of the order.
The issue of defying court orders is still with us — but it has taken a twist. Now the defiance is coming from inside the judicial branch itself, in the form of a lower-court mutiny against the Supreme Court. District Court judges, and in some cases even appellate courts, have either defied orders of the court outright or engaged in malicious compliance and evasion of those orders, in transparent bad faith.
In the past decade or so, increasing judicial overreach has caused harm to our constitutional order by limiting the ability of the executive branch to implement the program it was elected by the American people to pursue. It has been a scourge for both recent Republican and Democratic presidents, and it may provoke extreme measures to restore order. The recent defiance goes even further, threatening to damage the internal integrity of the judiciary, which ultimately relies on lower courts to follow the Supreme Court’s direction.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Roberts overall concern is how the SCOTUS will be viewed in history… While he ignores the historic black robe theatrics of political hacks pretending to be judges
Shortly we’ll see the NYT take this down with an apology to those offended.
Interesting but I am NOT going to click a link to the New York Slimes. It’s a clock so broken that it isn’t right twice a day. This article was it’s once this millenium.
nyt>>>please dont investigate our finances