Trump’s War on the Courts: Is the Backlash a Turning Point?

Published on Boncopia.com | May 6, 2025

A Growing Storm

President Donald Trump’s administration is under fire, and this time, the backlash is coming from unexpected corners—including his own appointees. From attacks on the judiciary to threats against Harvard’s tax-exempt status, Trump’s actions are sparking widespread criticism, even from influential figures like Joe Rogan. Legal experts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord, hosts of MSNBC’s Main Justice podcast, are sounding the alarm, warning that these moves threaten the rule of law. Let’s break down what’s happening, why it matters, and what it means for America’s future.

Trump’s Attacks on the Judiciary

Since returning to power in January 2025, Trump has intensified his criticism of the courts. A May 3, 2025, Reuters report revealed that at least 60 federal judges or appeals courts have slowed or blocked Trump’s initiatives, prompting a wave of harassment against judges and their families. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, speaking at a judges’ conference in Puerto Rico, called these attacks “not random” but “designed to intimidate the judiciary.” She warned that such actions risk “undermining our Constitution and the rule of law.”

The families of at least 11 judges have faced threats, according to Reuters, with some altering their daily routines for safety. David Levi, a former federal judge appointed by George H.W. Bush, told Reuters, “I don’t think most judges thought they were taking on risk to their families when they accepted the job.” Even Trump-appointed judges are pushing back, frustrated by what they see as unconstitutional overreach.

Targeting Harvard’s Tax-Exempt Status

Trump’s administration isn’t stopping at the courts. On April 15, 2025, the BBC reported that Trump threatened to strip Harvard University of its tax-exempt status after freezing $2 billion in federal funding. In a Truth Social post, Trump accused Harvard of pushing “political, ideological, and terrorist-inspired/supporting ‘Sickness,’” claiming its tax-exempt status should be contingent on acting in the “public interest.” This move followed a review of $256 million in federal contracts and $8.7 billion in multi-year grant commitments to the university, as noted by Congresswoman Elise Stefanik on X.

Universities like Harvard are typically exempt from federal income taxes, a benefit that can be revoked if they engage in political activities. Trump’s threat has raised concerns about the administration targeting institutions perceived as opposition strongholds, a tactic critics argue is authoritarian.

The Main Justice Breakdown

On the May 3, 2025, episode of MSNBC’s Main Justice podcast, legal experts Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord dissected Trump’s actions. They highlighted the “unorthodox nature” of Trump’s attacks, particularly his invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants—despite a court order blocking the move. Weissmann and McCord emphasized that the Department of Justice is meant to remain independent from the executive branch, yet Trump’s rhetoric and actions suggest an attempt to bend it to his will.

The podcast also noted a surprising shift: even Trump allies like Joe Rogan are turning against him. Rogan, a popular podcaster with a massive following, has reportedly expressed frustration with what he sees as unconstitutional overreach, signaling a broader backlash. “They’ve lost Joe Rogan,” Weissmann remarked, underscoring the significance of losing such a high-profile supporter.

A Pattern of Intimidation

Trump’s tactics aren’t new—they’re part of a pattern. Reuters reported that Elon Musk shared X posts targeting Judge Bates and his wife, falsely accusing her charity of receiving U.S. foreign aid and alleging a conflict of interest. Federal data disproved the claim, but the damage was done. Paul Grimm, a former U.S. district judge, told Reuters that such intimidation could deter qualified candidates from serving on the bench, warning, “No judge should worry that their families would be called into danger.”

This isn’t just about judges. The administration’s targeting of private law firms and dismantling of federal agencies, as discussed on Main Justice, signals a broader assault on institutional checks and balances. Ari Melber, in a related MSNBC legal special, highlighted how these moves are testing the resilience of the judicial system and the Supreme Court, which currently holds a 6-3 conservative majority.

Why This Matters

The rule of law is a cornerstone of American democracy, ensuring that no one—not even the president—is above accountability. Trump’s actions threaten this principle, raising fears of a constitutional crisis. Justice Jackson warned of a “combative atmosphere” that could destabilize governance, while Weissmann and McCord pointed to the erosion of judicial independence as a direct attack on democracy.

Public sentiment is shifting, too. A 2024 Pew Research Center report showed declining global trust in the U.S., with only 54% of Australians viewing the country favorably. If domestic institutions like the judiciary falter, America’s ability to lead on the world stage could weaken further, especially as rivals like China expand their influence through initiatives like the Belt and Road.

The Backlash Grows

The growing backlash isn’t just from legal experts. Influential voices like Joe Rogan signal a cultural shift, as even former supporters question Trump’s methods. On X, users are divided—some see the administration’s actions as necessary to “drain the swamp,” while others, like@Suzierizzo1in a related thread, call out Trump’s Mar-a-Lago meetings (charging $1 million for dinners) as corrupt. The tension is palpable, and it’s forcing Americans to confront a critical question: How far is too far?

What’s Next for America?

The judiciary’s resilience will be tested in the coming months. If Trump continues to push boundaries, the backlash could grow, potentially uniting a broader coalition against him. But if the administration succeeds in bending institutions to its will, the consequences for democracy could be profound. For now, the fight for the rule of law continues—and it’s one we can’t afford to ignore.

Let’s Discuss

• Do you think Trump’s attacks on the judiciary threaten democracy, or are they a necessary challenge to the status quo?

• How concerned are you about the safety of judges and their families in this climate?

• What can Americans do to protect the rule of law and ensure institutional independence?

• Has the backlash against Trump changed your view of his administration?

We’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments!

Word Count: 845