When Judges Act Like Presidents—How the Branches Can Respond

In his op‑ed, “Fake Little Presidents in Black Robes,” Phillip Jauregui issues a stirring warning: following heavy losses in the 2024 elections, some judges are not merely interpreting the law—they’re stepping into the shoes of the presidency, issuing rulings on gender policy, foreign aid, executive privacy, and more.

But our government wasn’t built for judicial overreach. The framers embedded separation of powers and checks and balances to prevent such usurpation. So, what safeguards exist when judges veer into policymaking?

1. Self-Repair from Within the Judiciary

• Trial courts must correct unlawful rulings.
• Appellate courts and the Supreme Court should reverse overreaches—though the Supreme Court acts only when cases are properly appealed.

2. Historical Executive Pushback

• Executive resistance isn’t new: Lincoln, Jackson, and even Obama faced pivotal judicial confrontations. Trump has said he will not defy court orders—leaving correctional responsibility to the judicial and legislative branches.

3. Congressional Power to Restore Balance

Congress possesses significant tools, including:

• Freezing judicial budgets (while protecting judges’ salaries)
• Investigating fraud and misuse in the courts
• Reforming court structure and jurisdiction
• Impeachment where warranted—justified by historical precedent (e.g., Judge John Pickering, 1804)

A Final Word

While legislative and executive action is available, the article urges the Supreme Court to proactively maintain the integrity of its branch—before deeper interventions become necessary

Read the full article here.