Senate Democrats raised concerns on Wednesday about whether President Donald Trump’s nominees for senior Justice Department positions would support defying court rulings. During the confirmation hearings, the nominees were pressed for their views on whether it would be acceptable for a president to ignore a court order. The nominees, including Aaron Reitz and John Sauer, indicated that they could not provide a definitive response without more specific details.
When asked by Sen. Dick Durbin about defying a court order, Reitz, nominated for assistant attorney general, emphasized that the legality of such actions would depend on the specific circumstances. He acknowledged that officials are bound by court decisions but noted that there may be exceptions where compliance is not required.
Similarly, Sauer, nominated for U.S. solicitor general, declined to weigh in on hypothetical scenarios, citing the complexity of the issue. He emphasized the general principle that officials should follow court orders unless there are valid reasons not to do so.
The discussion also touched on historical cases like Korematsu v. United States and Dred Scott v. Sandford, highlighting the importance of upholding constitutional rights and principles. When questioned by Sen. Cory Booker about moral disagreements with court orders, Reitz and the other nominees did not provide clear answers on whether defiance would be justified.
The hearings underscored the significance of upholding the rule of law and respecting judicial decisions, particularly in cases where fundamental rights are at stake. The nominees’ responses indicated a cautious approach to the issue of defying court orders, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of each situation before making a determination.
During the hearing, there was a notable reference to a tweet by Reitz which Booker brought up, highlighting Reitz’s comparison between the Dred Scott decision and the court’s ruling on same-sex marriages. In response, Reitz expressed his inability to provide a precise answer due to the hypothetical nature of the question.
Later on, Senate Democrats found some support from Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, who cautioned the nominees against undermining the decisions made by federal courts. Kennedy emphasized the importance of respecting and following the orders of federal courts, even if one may disagree with them. He also pointed out that while it is acceptable to criticize or appeal a court decision within the bounds of legal ethics, individuals should never refuse to follow a federal court order.
In a veiled critique of the Biden administration, Kennedy noted his concerns about attempts to undermine the credibility and authority of the federal judiciary over the past four years. He underscored the significance of the judiciary’s legitimacy, highlighting that it relies solely on this credibility as it does not have its own military force.
