Fact Check: The Supreme Court is enabling executive lawlessness under Trump.

Fact Check: "The Supreme Court is enabling executive lawlessness under Trump."

What We Know

The claim that "The Supreme Court is enabling executive lawlessness under Trump" arises from recent rulings regarding President Trump's executive actions, particularly Executive Order No. 14210, which aims to reorganize federal agencies and reduce the federal workforce significantly. The Supreme Court recently stayed a preliminary injunction from a lower court that had blocked the implementation of this executive order, allowing the Trump administration to proceed while legal challenges are ongoing (source-1, source-2).

The District Court had ruled that the executive order was likely unlawful, as it appeared to bypass the necessary congressional authorization for such significant changes to federal agencies. Justice Sotomayor, in her concurrence, expressed concerns about the implications of granting the stay, suggesting that it could allow the President to restructure federal agencies without congressional approval, which has traditionally been required (source-1, source-4).

Analysis

The Supreme Court's decision to grant a stay on the District Court's injunction can be interpreted in multiple ways. On one hand, it reflects the Court's belief that the Trump administration is likely to succeed in its argument that the executive order is lawful, which is a standard consideration in such cases (source-6). However, this ruling has raised alarms among critics who argue that it effectively allows the executive branch to act without the checks typically provided by Congress, thus enabling what some describe as "executive lawlessness" (source-5, source-7).

Critics point out that the dissenting opinions from Justices Jackson and Sotomayor emphasize the departure from established norms requiring congressional authorization for such sweeping changes (source-4). This dissent highlights concerns about the potential for executive overreach and the implications for the separation of powers.

The reliability of the sources cited is generally high, as they include official Supreme Court documents and reputable legal analyses. However, the interpretation of these rulings can vary widely based on political perspectives, which may affect the framing of the narrative around the Court's decisions.

Conclusion

The claim that "The Supreme Court is enabling executive lawlessness under Trump" is Partially True. While the Supreme Court's recent rulings do allow the Trump administration to proceed with its executive orders, which some interpret as a form of lawlessness, the Court's actions are grounded in legal principles regarding the likelihood of success on appeal. Critics of the ruling raise valid concerns about the implications for executive power and the need for congressional oversight, indicating that the situation is complex and multifaceted.

Fact Check: The Supreme Court is enabling executive lawlessness under Trump.