Trump’s reckless defiance is turning U.S. Courts into a toothless tiger

The U.S. judiciary risks becoming a toothless tiger as its authority faces unprecedented strain under President Trump’s second term, pushing the balance of power to its limits. Trump’s blatant disregard for court orders – spanning immigration, federal funding, and press access – has exposed a glaring weakness in America’s checks and balances.

A stark example centers on Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran immigrant deported despite a 2019 court order prohibiting it. In April 2025, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld a ruling to facilitate his return, but Trump and El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele have openly refused to comply during an Oval Office meeting. This isn’t isolated – Trump’s administration has ignored orders to release federal funding, barred The Associated Press from the White House press pool despite a court mandate, and faced criminal contempt charges over deportation flight orders. Legal scholars warn of “lawless defiance,” with reports calling it a “worrisome trend.”

Trump’s executive actions, like his attempt to revoke birthright citizenship, further challenge the judiciary. The Supreme Court recently debated nationwide injunctions blocking such orders, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson defending their necessity. Yet, Trump’s team, backed by figures like Elon Musk and J.D. Vance, argues these injunctions overreach, and their non-compliance bets on the courts’ inability to enforce rulings. During his first term, Trump complied more – like with the 2017 Muslim travel ban ruling – but his current stance is bolder.

Adding fuel to the fire, Trump has sacked 20 immigration judges, a move that began in February 2025, reportedly to purge those seen as obstructing his deportation agenda. This purge, coupled with a memo suggesting judges can’t rely on protections against arbitrary firing, lays groundwork for replacing them with loyalists who align with his policies. More alarmingly, his administration, led by Stephen Miller, is “actively looking at” suspending habeas corpus – the right to challenge detention in court – to bypass judicial oversight entirely. Miller has justified this by claiming an “invasion” of illegal immigration warrants it, a stance courts have rejected, but the idea hinges on whether judges “do the right thing” by his definition. This echoes Lincoln’s Civil War suspension, though legal experts argue only Congress can authorise it, casting doubt on its legitimacy.

Courts can issue sanctions or order arrests – former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos faced fines in 2019 for violating student loan orders – but they depend on the Justice Department and U.S. Marshals, both under Trump’s control. If they refuse to act, the judiciary’s power becomes symbolic. Public sentiment reflects a divide: some demand enforcement, while others back Trump’s defiance, seeing courts as obstacles.

The courts aren’t powerless yet – their rulings carry moral weight – but their ability to compel compliance is faltering. Trump’s actions, from judge purges to habeas suspension threats, risk turning them into a relic, undermining democracy as the world watches.

Dear reader, we need your support

Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.

One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.

With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.

Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969