In a recent press briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt expressed strong concerns about the federal judiciary’s impact on President Trump’s agenda, stating that federal judges have halted several significant reforms regarding immigration policy and government operations since his return to office. Leavitt emphasized that these judicial actions are creating a constitutional crisis.
Federal judges have issued preliminary rulings and injunctions against various administrative actions, raising alarms about the executive branch’s authority. One judge specifically noted that the administration failed to comply with a temporary restraining order related to its plans to freeze payments for grants and other programs.
Critics argue that the numerous legal challenges are indicative of President Trump’s overreach and disregard for the Constitution. In response, Leavitt firmly defended the administration’s position, stating, “The real constitutional crisis is taking place within our judicial branch.” She accused judges of overstepping their bounds by blocking fundamental executive functions.
During the briefing, Leavitt characterized these judicial rulings as a “continuation of the weaponization of justice” against Trump. She described the narrative that the administration is causing a crisis as “extremely dishonest” and criticized media outlets for their coverage on this issue.
President Trump echoed these sentiments in remarks from the Oval Office, describing the ongoing struggles with the judiciary as efforts to derail his administration’s initiatives. “We want to weed out the corruption, and it seems hard to believe that a judge could say, ‘we don’t want you to do that,'” he remarked, asserting that judicial actions raise serious questions about their legitimacy.
While acknowledging the power of courts to issue nationwide injunctions, Leavitt asserted that “these judges have no basis in the law,” reiterating her belief in the constitutionality of Trump’s actions. She expressed confidence that the administration would be vindicated upon appeal.
