By Kenneth Tiven
Like amateur tree surgeons, Donald Trump’s administration is aggressively pruning government structures—especially targeting the judiciary’s constitutional role in checking executive power.
More than 75 court cases have already been filed opposing Trump’s and Elon Musk’s disruptive overhaul of government programmes, immigrant rights, and public sector jobs. Each day reveals new or expanded attacks on America’s political, legal and social framework.
The Opposition is formidable, with lawyers, judges, constitutional law experts, employee unions and concerned citizens rallying to resist this tilt towards authoritarianism.
From George III To Donald I
Reflecting on Trump’s initial victory in 2016, this correspondent wondered if America was witnessing the start of a second revolution. The chaotic nature of Trump’s presidency saw his re-election bid in 2020 fail. But his comeback strategy appears calculated—aimed at reshaping the USA into a monarch-led state, echoing the shift from George III to Donald I, separated by 250 years.
Judicial Resistance: America’s Legal Firewall
The American judiciary’s 94 district courts, spanning across states and territories, provide a crucial counterweight to Trump’s aggressive agenda. With 878 judges—split between Democratic and Republican appointees—the courts are expected to uphold fairness. However, the Trump-Musk partnership’s defiance of judicial authority has created unprecedented tensions.
Defying The Courts: The Venezuela Deportation Scandal
Trump’s immigration crackdown recently escalated when his “border czar” claimed that 200 Venezuelan detainees were gang members and ordered them deported to a prison in El Salvador. This action relied on the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, rarely invoked in over two centuries. Washington District Court Judge James E Boasberg ordered the deportation plane to return for a legal review. His ruling was ignored.
“We’re not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think,” declared border chief Tom Homan. Government lawyers later argued that verbal rulings lacked authority until written—an incorrect assertion designed to delay justice.
Trump’s Assault On Judicial Integrity
In response to Judge Boasberg’s ruling, Trump unleashed a tirade on social media, calling him a “Radical Left Lunatic” and demanding his impeachment. US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts offered a rare rebuke, stating: “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”
Nevertheless, Trump’s relentless attacks on judges have escalated public anxiety, as he positions the judiciary as an enemy of his administration’s aggressive policies.
Threats To Judicial Independence
US Marshals have warned federal judges of rising threats as Trump loyalists discredit court rulings. Meanwhile, Elon Musk has amplified the assault with inflammatory posts labelling judges as “corrupt,” “radical evil,” and deriding the “TYRANNY of the JUDICIARY.” Musk’s call to “impeach judges” for blocking government dismantling efforts reflects a disturbing push to undermine judicial independence.
“I’ve never seen judges as uneasy as they are now,” said John Jones III, a former district judge appointed by George W Bush.
Restoring Order: Judicial Pushback
Despite mounting pressure, federal courts are pushing back:
- Judge James K Bredar in Maryland halted a mass firing of 25,000 federal employees, ruling the administration’s action unlawful.
- In California, Judge William Alsup ordered the reinstatement of wrongly terminated employees and fiercely criticized the government’s evasive tactics: “I’m tired of seeing you stonewall… I doubt you’re telling me the truth.”
- In Maryland, Judge Theodore Chuang ruled that Musk’s unauthorized dismantling of USAID violated constitutional protocols, exposing Musk’s de facto power in government decision-making.
Authoritarian Drift And Democratic Fragility
Trump’s governance model—marked by mass firings, the dismantling of federal programmes, and flagrant disregard for judicial rulings—echoes autocratic tendencies.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who successfully prosecuted Trump for 34 felony counts, underscored the stakes: “Democracy requires courage.” She likened Trump’s corrupt methods to Richard Nixon’s, but described Trump’s behaviour as far more reckless.
An Uncertain Future
While legal rulings have halted some of Trump’s most extreme actions, America’s political landscape remains tense. Congressional leaders face voter frustration over rising living costs and unstable financial markets. With Trump’s rhetoric fuelling division and unease, the judiciary may be the final safeguard in preserving America’s constitutional order.
—The writer has worked in senior positions at The Washington Post, NBC, ABC and CNN and also consults for several Indian channels