The White House’s radical agenda and general indifference to legal limits had already sparked discussion about whether there’s a burgeoning “constitutional crisis,” but that conversation took an unsettling turn over the weekend. In the wake of a Saturday morning court ruling that the administration didn’t like, Donald Trump, JD Vance and Elon Musk separately made comments that raised the specter of the White House rejecting decisions from the judiciary that they disagreed with.
The fact that the president, vice president and a top campaign donor even opened such a door raised new fears about the future of constitutional order in the United States.
Making matters worse, Trump has since added to the controversy with veiled threats and provocative rhetoric about the judiciary, including comments such as “We have to look at the judges.”
As for how this is being received on Capitol Hill, House Speaker Mike Johnson suggested he’s aligned with the White House, but at least some GOP voices have expressed public support for the U.S. system of government. The Hill reported on Republican Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota commenting on MSNBC about the need to follow court decisions.
On Tuesday, Rounds was asked by MSNBC about the judges who are pushing back on President Trump’s executive orders. “I think it’s a very, very clear line between the powers that are there, that are appropriate. This president is saying, ‘I believe I have the authority,’” Rounds said. “You find out in a court of law and if they are appropriate, you move forward with them.”
Asked specifically whether lawmakers will have to follow rulings from the judiciary, the South Dakotan told MSNBC: “We have to.”
Around the same time, Business Insider asked Sen. Josh Hawley if he’d side with Trump if the White House defied court rulings. “That, I think you can’t do,” the Missouri Republican said. “Andrew Jackson did that, infamously. He was wrong on that. That was the Trail of Tears. That was lawless.”
On the surface, it’s certainly reassuring to see at least some GOP senators — who do not have a reputation for moderation — publicly declare their support for recognizing judicial authority.
But just below the surface, a question lingers: What does it say about the state of the Republican Party and American politics in 2025 that officials are even being asked?
Stepping back, in the 2022 and 2024 election cycles, a great many GOP candidates and incumbents were asked whether they’d accept the results of their races. The responses ranged from encouraging to scary. What went largely overlooked, however, was the unsettling fact the question had become necessary. In the not-too-distant past, prominent American politicians were not asked whether they were prepared to accept their own country’s election results. The line of inquiry was wholly unnecessary: Our political system was stable and healthy enough to make the answer to such a question obvious. But as the radicalization of Republican politics has intensified, leading officials from the party haven’t just confronted the question, they’re also hedging while replying. In 2025, Americans are confronting a similar dynamic: For generations, presidents, vice presidents and members of Congress weren’t asked questions about judicial authority. The answers were assumed. It was a foregone conclusion that American policymakers respected the American system. The bipartisan consensus on this went unquestioned. But just as the “will you accept election results?” question was the result of Trump’s first term, the “should court rulings be followed?” question is the apparent result of his second.
Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans' War on the Recent Past."
Latest Post
Recommended
