The president must follow the law like everyone else.

([link removed])

Donald Trump’s lawbreaking spree has now been met with an unprecedented series of judicial rebukes. Just yesterday, five federal courts blocked some of his administration’s moves to shut down agencies, illegally fire anticorruption officials, and more. Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought once said we were living in a “post-constitutional era.” We’re finding out if that is true.

Start with the central fact: In his first days, Trump effectively claimed the ability to control federal spending without Congress, freezing trillions of dollars

([link removed])

in grants and loans. This violates the Constitution’s core separation of powers, as well as the Impoundment Act and numerous other specific rules. He unilaterally shut down agencies including the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the world’s largest humanitarian organization. Yesterday he effectively shuttered the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was created after the 2008 financial crash in an attempt to ward off more fraud in the markets. Scientists across the country are realizing that funds have essentially been cut off for vital research. He’s done all this while tasking the world’s richest man, who paid for much of Trump’s campaign, with destroying agencies, one at a time.

State attorneys general, public employees, and nonprofits all sued, and courts blocked this presidential power grab. Over and over, Trump’s team lost. It’s a record of court losses unmatched since, well, his effort to undo the result of the 2020 election.

Presidents must follow court orders. Ever since the Civil War, they have, often unhappily. Whatever debates there might be about the powers of the three branches of the federal government, if you don’t like a lower court ruling, you appeal it — you don’t ignore it.

On Saturday, Judge Paul Engelmayer blocked one of the most controversial and scariest moves: the takeover of the Treasury Department’s federal payments system by Elon Musk and his callow band of engineers. Robert Rubin, Lawrence Summers, and three other former treasury secretaries warned

([link removed])

of Musk and Trump’s assault on the Constitution. “A key component of the rule of law is the executive branch’s commitment to respect Congress’s power of the purse: The legislative branch has the sole authority to pass laws that determine where and how federal dollars should be spent.”

Vice President JD Vance responded to the judge’s order by declaring that “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.” Musk called the ruling “shady” and “absolutely insane!” So far, this huffing and snorting may just be bluffing. Earlier this week, the Treasury Department told the court that it would abide by the judicial order and promptly appealed. That’s what you are supposed to do.

Another federal judge warned that the administration had not complied

([link removed])

with his order to unfreeze federal research spending. The government insists that it is trying to do so. This may be a quiet, insidious strategy: Don’t loudly announce defiance of the law, just do it softly while insisting that all is well. (It is also possible that the federal government is not a toggle switch that can be turned on and off.)

Many of these cases will head to the Supreme Court soon. Generations of justices have insisted on following judicial orders. But this is the same supermajority that truckled to Trump in the immunity case last summer, if nothing else giving him a permission structure for lawlessness. Will the Supreme Court step up?

I’m no fan of judicial overreach. There are reasons to think that the system of individual judges issuing national injunctions is not a good one. We’ve decried judges like Matthew Kacsmaryk, who tried to impose his own anti-abortion views nationwide by undoing the quarter-century-old federal approval of mifepristone. Liberals should be self-aware as we lionize a federal judiciary that too often has proven itself captured by big money and extreme factions.

But refusing to follow a court order crosses a very clear, very dangerous line. If Trump refuses to follow court orders, especially from the Supreme Court, we will have tipped from chaos into dire crisis.

Checks and balances require Congress to do its part. Don’t bet on it. Today’s Republican lawmakers are prostrate before the executive.

The justices must do their part, too. Vance’s bluster may aim to cause them to back off. This Court, if nothing else, has rhetorically been committed to the notion that Congress, not unelected bureaucrats, must set the laws. If ever there were a “major question” (the recently invented doctrine

([link removed])

used to block environmental regulations), it would be what Musk and his minions are doing.

And we the people have to do our part, too. It’s been heartening to read that Capitol Hill switchboards are jammed. In Pakistan and Israel, when the courts have been threatened, citizens protested in the streets. We hope it won’t come to that, but all of us should be ready.

Campaign Finance Watchdog in Turmoil

Last week, Trump ousted the Democratic chair of the Federal Election Commission, the bipartisan agency responsible for overseeing campaign finance. It’s a rare and controversial move: No president has ever dismissed an opposing party commissioner without having a valid reason or consulting with that party’s congressional leaders on a replacement. The timing is troubling, as the FEC is set to decide on complaints involving both Trump and Musk. It also “opens the door to a partisan takeover of the watchdog agency that both sides of the aisle have long agreed needs to be independent and free from political weaponization,” Daniel Weiner writes. Read more

([link removed])

New York’s Solution to Big Money in Politics

So far, one of the most promising ways to counter the growing influence of megadonors in politics is through public campaign financing. New York’s small-donor matching program has become one of the most effective legislative solutions to date. A new Brennan Center report explores how this program has boosted small donors’ participation and discusses its potential as a model for other governments looking to curb big money’s harmful effects on democracy. Read more

([link removed])

Voting Access Under Threat

Republicans in Congress are pushing a bill that would require every American to show a passport, birth certificate, or one of a few other citizenship documents every time they register or re-register to vote. But more than 21 million American citizens don’t have easy access to such documents. If enacted, the legislation would upend most methods of voter registration, including registering online and by mail. “The SAVE Act would disenfranchise huge numbers of Americans, and Congress should reject it,” Wendy Weiser and Andrew Garber write. Read more

([link removed])

A Misstep in the Fight Against Cartels

Trump has directed the secretary of state to designate “certain international cartels” as foreign terrorist organizations. While the idea of branding cartels as terrorists may seem like a good way to crack down on the drug trade and migrant smuggling, it may be more harmful than helpful, Rachel Levinson-Waldman argues. She explains in Just Security what the foreign terrorist organization designation involves and why it’s not the right approach to tackling cartels. Read more

([link removed])

PODCAST: Trump’s Initial Power Plays

Our latest episode analyzes the president’s executive orders regarding the TikTok ban, birthright citizenship, and border enforcement. Dean Emeritus of NYU School of Law Trevor Morrison joins Brennan Center fellow Wilfred Codrington III to examine the theme that underlies these expansive executive actions and what they reveal about the Trump administration’s theory of presidential authority. Listen on Spotify

([link removed])

, Apple Podcasts

([link removed])

, or your favorite podcast platform

([link removed])



News

Lauren-Brooke Eisen on private prisons under Trump // CNN

([link removed])

Barton Gellman on Trump’s first weeks in office // PBS NEWS HOUR

([link removed])

Lawrence Norden on cutting federal teams that fight foreign interference // WASHINGTON POST

([link removed])

Spencer Reynolds on the impact of downscaling Department of Homeland Security oversight // BLOOMBERG GOVERNMENT

([link removed])

Feedback on this newsletter? Email us at [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]







([link removed])

Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

120 Broadway, Suite 1750 New York, NY 10271

646-292-8310

tel:646-292-8310

[email protected]

Support Brennan Center

[link removed]

View Online

[link removed]

Want to change how you receive these emails or unsubscribe? Click here

[link removed]

to update your preferences.

([link removed]

([link removed]

([link removed]

([link removed]

([link removed]

([link removed]

([link removed]

([link removed]

([link removed]