Lawfare: the last Democratic trench against Trump

Judges appointed by recent presidents have become the last line of defense against Donald Trump. In the face of Blue Party leaders’ inability to establish an effective strategy to halt the deluge of executive orders coming from the president, the courts—led by appointees of Clinton, Obama, and Biden—are proving brutally effective in blocking them “one after another,” in the words of Chuck Schumer.

From Elon Musk's DOGE-driven cuts and layoffs, to deportations of undocumented immigrants with criminal records, to making voter identification mandatory, the courts have been relentless in, at the very least, delaying Trump's agenda.

This is no coincidence. The Democratic Party seems determined to prove right those who—led by Trump—accuse them of weaponizing the justice system to achieve their political goals. They did it through the DOJ under Biden, with lawsuits aimed at bringing down the tycoon before the election, and with the persecution of Christians and pro-life activists. And they continue to do so from the opposition, after being forced by voters to leave the White House and losing their Senate majority.

Schumer unveiled the Democratic tactic:" 235 progressive judges" against Trump

In fact, beyond conjecture, the strategy has been openly laid out by the Senate minority leader. In an interview, Schumer laid his cards on the table: the Democratic opposition would rely on judges appointed by Democratic presidents to strike down executive initiatives at the first instance, while waiting for appellate courts and, ultimately, the Supreme Court to rule in their favor.

"Yes, our democracy is at risk because Donald Trump shows that he wishes to violate the laws in many, many different ways. The good news here is, we did put 235 judges, progressive judges, judges not under the control of Trump, last year on the bench, and they are ruling against Trump time after time after time. And we hope that the appellate courts, when it gets up there, and the Supreme Court will uphold those rulings. They restored the money to NIH. They required that 8,000 employees, federal employees, have to come back. We're in over 100 lawsuits against them, and we are having a good deal of success. It's only at the lower court level right now."

Flurry of court setbacks for the administration

Although many of the triumphs of the left at the polls have been arriving in dribs and drabs, last Thursday left an avalanche of setbacks for Trump, who saw three federal judges knock down as many initiatives of his administration.

The first ruling of the day came from the hand of Landya B. McCafferty. The New Hampshire district judge, an Obama appointee, who blocked Trump's executive order to freeze funding to schools that fund DEI initiatives.

Order to return second illegal migrant deported to El Salvador

The second setback was the order demanding the Administration to return a deported illegal immigrant to jail in El Salvador. According to Stephanie Gallagher, a Maryland district judge, the Trump Administration violated an agreement reached last year with a group of migrants who entered the United States as unaccompanied minors and applied for asylum.

Voter ID on hold

Subsequently Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, put on hold Donald Trump's executive order to force voters to identify themselves in order to exercise their right as a measure to guarantee the cleanliness of the elections.

With these rulings there are now 108 judicial setbacks to administration initiatives in just three months since the Republican's inauguration.