What happens if President Trump defies a judge’s order?

WASHINGTON – US President Donald Trump’s rush to unleash power through an avalanche of executive orders has triggered court rulings that slowed many of his most aggressive actions. But it has also raised the question of what judges can do if he chooses to defy them.  

So far, judges have

blocked Mr Trump’s orders to end birthright citizenship,

freeze trillions of dollars in federal spending and allow billionaire Elon Musk’s government efficiency effort, DOGE, to access government payments data. Dozens of lawsuits challenging other actions by Mr Trump are pending.

Amid this pressure on the court system, Vice-President J. D. Vance posted on X that judges “aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power”.

While Mr Trump often belittles and demeans judges who rule against him, after Mr Vance’s post, Mr Trump said he will follow the law and appeal decisions that do not go his way.

Advocacy groups and Democratic state officials say they are nonetheless alarmed, arguing Mr Trump poses a unique threat to the rule of law – and the system of checks and balances that is supposed to restrain the judicial, executive and legislative branches.

Seventeen state attorneys-general, mostly Democrats, said in a joint statement that they will not hesitate to act if Mr Trump violates the Constitution or federal law.   

What can judges do if Trump defies them?

Judges have no ability to take action against a US president, who has broad immunity for official actions. But they do have a few tools to use against his appointees, civil servants or government agencies.

They can find agency officials or their lawyers in contempt of court and fine them. They can impose financial sanctions on agencies for failure to comply. And in extreme cases, they can jail officials for contempt.

Judges can also grant injunctions that block parts or all of an executive order, as four jurists have done with Mr Trump’s attempt to terminate citizenship for people born in the US whose parents are undocumented immigrants.

In a separate case, a Trump-appointed judge paused the President’s plan to put more than 2,000 US Agency for International Development employees on leave.

Another judge delayed a deadline for a federal worker buyout programme to allow “proper consideration”.

What if other Trump officials don’t comply with a judicial order?

Even if judges suspect administration officials of acting in bad faith, they have limited ability to conduct their own fact-finding. They can order agency officials – even Cabinet secretaries – to answer questions.

For instance, during Mr Trump’s first term, a judge questioned the credibility of the government’s “hasty, unexplained” plans for the 2020 census and ordered former Commerce Department secretary Wilbur Ross to sit for depositions in lawsuits.

When judges rule against the executive branch, it can trigger protracted negotiations between a judge and an agency over how to comply with the court’s order, Yale law professor Nicholas Parrillo explained in a 2018 analysis of conflicts over administrative law. 

Prof Parrillo’s study, published in the Harvard Law Review, referred to 67 cases in which an agency or official was cited for contempt of court.

Mr Trump’s first education secretary, Ms Elisabeth DeVos, was found in contempt over an order to stop collecting on loans owed by students. Since then, the department has filed 63 monthly reports on its compliance.

In rare instances, judges have exercised their power to jail government officials for contempt in administrative law cases; Prof Parrillo’s study identified four such cases.

Instead, judges tend to rely on the power of shame to bring officials into compliance with their directives. Similarly, appellate courts have looked askance on sanctioning agencies, and “unfailingly halt them” even as they uphold their legality, the study found.

Who can back a judge up?

Judges have no police powers, but they can order the US Marshals to bring someone to court. While the marshals must comply with a judicial order, they also work for the Justice Department, which is under the President’s control. This could theoretically trigger a major clash if the President orders marshals not to comply with a judge’s order.

What’s a constitutional crisis?

It doesn’t have a precise definition. Scholars generally say it involves a president’s refusal to comply with an order from the Supreme Court or a lower judge if the high court returns a case to them.

Mr Trump has

pardoned more than 1,500 people who attacked the US Capitol

in January 2021, fired the prosecutors who worked on their cases and sacked employees who were not sufficiently loyal to him.

Several prosecutors in the US Justice Department resigned rather than carry out an order from senior leaders to drop a corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, a Trump ally.

The President also has raised legal objections to each of the lawsuits filed against his executive orders and appealed several judicial orders.

“I’m urging caution before we get to this hair-on-fire moment of constitutional crisis,” said Ms Mary McCord, a Georgetown University law professor. “Is it possible that we’ll get there? It is, but we’re not there yet.” BLOOMBERG