Donald Trump and his team must’ve known that their hyperaggressive agenda and indifference to legal limits would generate all kinds of litigation. That is, of course, precisely what’s happened in recent weeks, with lawsuits challenging everything from the radical White House spending freeze to legally dubious firings to rewarding Elon Musk’s DOGE endeavor with access to highly sensitive information.
At least so far, the president and the administration’s lawyers are facing headwinds in the courts. As NBC News reported, “The courts are slamming the brakes on some of President Donald Trump’s efforts to quickly trim and transform the federal government.”
But in some instances, it’s not just the fact that Team Trump is losing that matters, it’s also how the White House is losing. Take the fight over birthright citizenship, for example.
The language of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment does not lend itself to wiggle room. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” it reads. In other words, if you’re born in the U.S., you’re a citizen of the U.S.
Nevertheless, on Inauguration Day, the new Republican president kept one of his uglier campaign promises and issued an executive order that not only rejected the constitutional principle but also directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize U.S. citizenship for children who do not meet the administration’s new standards.
As my MSNBC colleague Jordan Rubin has reported, the lawsuits challenging Trump’s order have fared well, and U.S. District Judge John Coughenour this week extended a temporary hold on the policy, characterizing the White House’s policy as brazenly unconstitutional.
But it’s worth appreciating the degree to which Coughenour — named to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan — lowered the boom on Team Trump. The longtime jurist concluded:
It has become ever more apparent that to our president, the rule of law is but an impediment to his policy goals. The rule of law is, according to him, something to navigate around or simply ignore, whether that be for political or personal gain. Nevertheless, in this courtroom and under my watch, the rule of law is a bright beacon which I intend to follow.
“The Constitution,” the judge added, “is not something the government can play policy games with.”
Ouch.
This was hardly the only recent example of Trump facing judicial eloquence in the midst of a legal setback — some of the rulings in Jan. 6 cases are especially notable — and given the scope of the lawsuits surrounding the White House’s agenda, it probably won’t be the last.
