By Tom Hals (Reuters) – Elon Musk and other supporters of Donald Trump criticized federal judges on Tuesday for halting the president’s major initiatives, such as ending birthright citizenship, questioning the judiciary’s independence in some instances. Musk used his X social media platform to attack the judge who instructed U.S. health agencies to temporarily restore websites taken offline in response to a Trump executive order. The order is currently in effect while legal briefs are being prepared for a longer injunction. Musk, with 217 million X followers, suggested removing the judge, questioning the idea of lifetime appointments for judges regardless of their rulings. He also claimed there was a “judicial coup” undermining the country.
Trump, blaming “highly political judges” for impeding his agenda, later stated he would respect court decisions and appeal those unfavorable to him and Musk’s anti-waste efforts. The White House Press Secretary vowed to continue fighting for Trump’s supporters, criticizing what she deemed as unjust injunctions against the administration.
While the administration faced setbacks in court, some Republican members of Congress defended the judiciary, emphasizing the importance of following court orders. The American Bar Association cautioned that the rule of law was in jeopardy and denounced statements from Trump’s allies as threats to the constitutional system.
In addition to Musk, Vice President JD Vance criticized judges on X, asserting that judges should not interfere with the executive branch’s lawful authority. Musk also targeted judges who ruled against Trump policies and criticized law firms assisting advocacy groups in challenging these policies.
Trump has a history of criticizing judges who rule against him, while Musk has faced legal challenges for defying court orders in the past. Over 50 lawsuits have been filed against Trump.
Progressive advocates and Democratic state attorneys general are challenging several initiatives, alleging that they violate various laws governing spending, administrative procedures, protections for federal workers, freedom of religion, and more. A federal judge recently declared that the Trump administration had disobeyed a court order that had temporarily preserved federal funding for grants and loans supporting numerous state programs. The Justice Department lawyers claimed that the administration believed it was compliant and did not contest the judge’s request for clarification.
This week, a group of Democratic attorneys general gathered in Los Angeles to strategize on how to respond should the Trump administration persist in defying court rulings and to determine the appropriate course of action to hold Trump or others in contempt of court. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes affirmed, “We are actively addressing the situation, engaging in discussions, and devising a comprehensive plan to tackle it.”
The ongoing assault on the judiciary is occurring amidst escalating threats of violence targeting judges and the dissemination of false information on social media platforms. Chief Justice John Roberts highlighted in December that such disinformation campaigns were eroding the judiciary’s independence.
In his final year as president, Joe Biden proposed implementing term limits for the Supreme Court, which he characterized as an “extreme court.” The article was reported by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware, with additional contributions from Nate Raymond in Boston and Jody Godoy in Los Angeles. The editing was done by Noeleen Walder, Amy Stevens, and Gerry Doyle.
