Trump Attacks the Judiciary

While other presidents have clashed with the courts, Trump's confrontations are unquestionably unique in their scale and fury, and they were perhaps inevitable, given that he arrived in the White House with a blizzard of executive orders aimed at getting what he wanted quickly. On day one alone, 26 were signed.

There have been another 140 to the beginning of July – more than President Joe Biden signed during his four-year term, and only around 100 fewer than President Barack Obama in his eight years in the White House.

The sweeping nature of the orders he has signed, many touching on constitutional issues such as the right of everyone born in the US to citizenship, has led to dozens of nationwide injunctions pending the outcome on the merits of the individual cases.

That is why Trump's Supreme Court victory at the end of June, curbing such nationwide injunctions, is so significant.

The administration has deployed various arguments. The judiciary has been accused of "overreach" and judges themselves accused of being "activists". But perhaps the most fundamental – and most philosophical – criticism is that they are standing in the way of the will of the people.

As Stephen Miller has put it, "out of control Marxist judges" are standing in the way of the "desires of the electorate".

It's an argument that, according to many judges, misunderstands the constitution in a fundamental way.

"We're a nation of laws, not men," explains judge John E Jones III. "A mandate to the president of the United States does not mean a mandate to disregard the law. That's evident, but this is papering over a fundamental disregard of the law and the constitution."

Some vocal critics of the president go further and claim he's tearing up the whole system of checks and balances in which the three equal branches of government (the presidency, congress and the judiciary) each act as a brake on the others.

"This is a huge turning point for the country," says Professor Laurence Tribe, one of the nation's foremost constitutional experts, who has become a forthright critic of the president.

He argues that Congress has ceased to perform its oversight function and fears "the United States is facing a catastrophic situation".

"The idea of three branches… was hatched at our founding - before the rise of political parties and before the rise of demagogues as effective and charismatic as Trump," he told me. "The whole system is completely out of balance."

But if there truly is a plan to defy or neuter the courts, the judiciary is not giving in without a fight.

Even after the Supreme Court ruled to curb those nationwide injunctions at the end of June (incidentally, presidents of both parties have complained about such injunctions in the past), another judge slapped one on Trump's asylum policy.

Earlier this month, a US district judge issued a fresh nationwide block on Trump's executive order restricting the automatic right to citizenship for babies born to undocumented migrants or foreign visitors, drawing more furious words from the White House.