My column today in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Bruce Ledewitz: The Supreme Court will step up and Trump will back down

Special to the Post-Gazette

Feb 24, 2025

5:30 AM

Since his inauguration, Donald Trump has been acting like a king in ways that either violate the Constitution under existing law or would do so if anyone involved in creating the Constitution been able to imagine a president doing such things.

The number of illegal actions is dizzying, but a short list will suffice as illustration.

Under existing precedent, the President cannot impound funds allocated by Congress. He cannot alter the structure of the Executive Branch by closing agencies, allotting statutory functions elsewhere, or putting agencies under a new management scheme.

He cannot fire officials and employees at will, when, like the Chair of the Federal Reserve, they have statutory protection. He cannot unilaterally change U.S. economic policy under the ruse of spurious national security concerns.

Nor can a private citizen turned “special government employee” like Elon Musk exercise executive authority as if he were an officer of the United States.

All the illegality

The above list is necessarily a short one. It is hard to keep up with all the illegality. There is so much illegality going on that you have to assume Trump is daring the courts to do something about it.

The question then is not whether the lower courts will enjoin Trump’s actions. They are already beginning to do so.

The real question is, when these cases get to the Supreme Court, will the Justices uphold the law or will the Court confirm the MAGA revolution and rescind the Constitution? Those are the stakes.

The details of the coming cases matter less than Trump’s premise: “I am the supreme law.” Will the Justices affirm that? After all, last year, this same Court enlarged presidential criminal immunity and kept Trump on the ballot.

The good news is that the Justices will not capitulate.

Critics forget that the Justices did not rubber stamp Trump during his first term. They have never abandoned fundamental legal principles.

The very breadth of lawlessness by Trump and his allies renders it all the more unlikely that the Justices will rule for him. I don’t even see how you could write an opinion upholding most of Trump’s actions. No reading of the Constitution allows for a king.

When the Court says no

The second crucial question then becomes, what will Trump do when the Court issues a very general no? The New York Times columnist David French echoes many in worrying that Trump will say, in words attributed to President Andrew Jackson, “the Court has made its decision. Now, let them enforce it.”

The rest of the good news is that there is zero chance of Trump ignoring an order by the Court — for several reasons.

First, like most bullies, Trump is weak. If you push back, he caves in. What policy has Trump ever stuck to in the face of serious opposition? Nor has Trump threatened to defy the Court.

Second, the market, which is Trump’s Gallup Poll, would go down if Trump defied the Court. Business people may like tax cuts and deregulation, but they need an independent judiciary to protect private property and an independent Fed to control inflation. They know that, without both, presidents will seize their assets without paying compensation and implement irresponsible monetary policies.

Finally, if he defied the Court, Trump’s allies would come after him like a pack of snarling dogs. The Federalist Society — that collection of alleged protectors of the Constitution — years ago made a Faustian bargain with Trump. They promised to remain quiet while he shredded the Constitution as long as he gave them the Supreme Court. Trump nominated their picks and they now control the Court.

But that bargain is broken if Trump ignores a Supreme Court order. Without judicial review, business loses money and the Federalist Society loses power. And that is what both really care about.

This is the good news. Unfortunately it is temporary. In a real constitutional Republic that loved liberty, there would already be massive street protests and a Tesla boycott.

Instead, Trump’s ratings remain high. We still have a Constitution. But if we want a king, we will eventually have one.

When he comes for social security

All is not lost. Maybe people don’t care about orphans in Africa losing aid or cancer trials being cancelled. But what happens when Democrats remind people that under Trump’s theories, he does not have to send out your Social Security check?

If Elon Musk finds these payments to be inefficient, Trump can reduce your check or eliminate it. And no court can order him to send your check in full.

If you think you have a legal right to your Social Security payment and that a court can order Trump to send it, you better call your Republican Party Representatives and Senators — our Sen. Dave McCormick, for example — and tell them to grow a backbone and tell Trump to stop.

We fought one revolution to get rid of a king. Trump is wrong that America wants another. More importantly, the Supreme Court doesn’t want another.

Bruce Ledewitz is a professor of law at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law of Duquesne University. His previous article was “It’s time to stop presidents from abusing the power to pardon.” The views expressed do not represent those of Duquesne University.

First Published: February 24, 2025, 5:30 a.m.