President Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s chaotic tag-team effort to audit and reform the federal government is, unsurprisingly, running into legal challenges, with multiple federal courts ordering a halt to their actions pending further litigation. The typical approach for any administration is to hold its fire and file appeals challenging these rulings. But many influential voices on the right are instead advocating for an approach that threatens to cause a genuine constitutional crisis — brazenly defying federal courts instead of complying with their rulings.
Vice President JD Vance has repeatedly said over the years that he thinks presidents should ignore court rulings they consider “illegitimate.” He echoed this sentiment in a post about the recent judicial standoff, writing, “Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”
Many influential voices on the right are instead advocating for an approach that threatens to cause a genuine constitutional crisis.
Meanwhile, Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said Trump should “take a page out of Andrew Jackson’s playbook,” referring to the infamous historical example in which President Jackson defied a Supreme Court ruling to move forward with the brutal forced relocation of Native Americans via the “Trail of Tears.” (You wouldn’t think that a sitting member of Congress would cite such a heinous historical example positively … but apparently you would be wrong.)
Some in the MAGA punditry sphere are also advocating for this drastic tactic.
“If a district court judge tries to usurp the authority of the chief executive of this country, he should absolutely defy it,” political commentator Scott Jennings said. “Ignore this disgusting freak,” Daily Wire host Matt Walsh similarly said of another federal judge who ruled against the Trump administration. “Judges are completely out of control in this country.”
This view is so extreme that even some die-hard MAGA warriors, like Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., aren’t on board. Reporter Bryan Metzger asked him about suggestions Trump should ignore the courts, and Hawley said, “You can’t do that.”
“Andrew Jackson did that, infamously,” the senator continued. “He was wrong on that. That was the Trail of Tears. That was lawless. That was wrong.”
Kudos to Hawley, who previously practiced constitutional law, for retaining some shred of integrity and common sense. (Other MAGA loyalists ought to consider how far beyond the pale this idea is when it has lost even Josh Hawley.)
It’s hard to understate how destructive this approach, if taken, would be for our constitutional order and system of checks and balances. Simply put, if presidents start routinely ignoring rulings against them they disagree with, the courts quickly lose their power, and an important check on the president that prevents overreach is effectively neutered.
“If the president is able to defy or ignore court orders against him, then the executive branch would be effectively free of legal constraints on its actions — including those of the Constitution,” law professor Ilya Somin explains. “It could violate constitutional rights, usurp the authority of Congress, and more. In that scenario, we would no longer have a constitutionally constrained federal government, except perhaps in name only.”
Newsflash, conservatives: If Trump can just ignore rulings that go against him, so can the next Democratic president. It really doesn’t matter whether one supports the Trump administration’s underlying efforts or not — no short-term policy goal is worth destroying our system of checks and balances. The absurd impatience of this drastic approach is even more glaring when you consider that the Supreme Court is currently controlled by a 6-3 conservative majority, meaning the Trump administration ultimately faces favorable odds if it appeals rulings limiting its efforts. And newsflash, conservatives: If Trump can just ignore rulings that go against him, so can the next Democratic president. After all, President Joe Biden’s efforts were repeatedly stymied by the judicial branch, on everything from student loan cancellation to Covid vaccination mandates to the nationwide “eviction moratorium.” But under the approach many Republicans are advocating for today, Biden could’ve simply declared these rulings “illegitimate” and enforced his agenda anyway. Is that really something conservatives want to enable? Some MAGA pundits, like Jennings, argue that Biden set a precedent and “defied” the Supreme Court when it blocked his student loan cancellation efforts. This is not accurate, as Somin explains. Biden did try to work around the court’s ruling and use different legal methods that hadn’t been struck down to cancel student debt, but he abided by its ruling, and his original $400 billion debt-relief effort never went forward. To be fair to the MAGA right, some in the Democratic Party have also participated in the ongoing erosion of our checks and balances. When a Trump-appointed judge issued a controversial ruling about abortion medication in April 2023, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., openly said the Biden administration should “ignore it.” Other Democratic leaders, like Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, said the same. But thankfully, Biden ignored their reckless calls, which conservatives had no trouble recognizing as dangerous and destructive at the time. Keeping that same energy now that Republicans are in power is a simple test of basic integrity and intellectual consistency. Sadly, it’s one that many on the right are utterly and woefully failing.
Brad Polumbo
Brad Polumbo is an independent journalist and host of the "Brad vs Everyone" podcast. 
