Legal experts are warning that if President Trump were to openly defy court orders, judges could take a page out of history and apply a “Nixon-style” approach to hold him accountable. This could involve using severe legal measures to force compliance, much like the actions taken against President Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandal. Nixon’s defiance of a court order ultimately led to a Supreme Court ruling that forced him to hand over crucial evidence. Now, legal experts are saying that judges could use similar tactics to compel the Trump administration to follow the law if it ignores court rulings.
The Trump administration has been accused of pushing the limits of executive power, with several of its actions appearing to defy court orders. One of the most recent examples occurred when the administration deported hundreds of alleged gang members to El Salvador, despite a judge’s decision blocking the use of the 19th Century Alien Enemies Act in this case. When asked if the administration had violated the court’s order, Trump deflected, saying, “You’d have to speak to the lawyers about that.” This has sparked concerns about what judges can do to stop the administration from openly flouting the courts.
Legal experts say that judges have a powerful tool at their disposal: contempt of court charges. This could include civil contempt, where judges would impose escalating fines on government officials for each day they refuse to comply with a court order. Constitutional law professor Michael Dorf from Cornell University explained that if the administration is found in contempt, fines could be levied against relevant officials, such as the Secretary of the Treasury. However, Dorf also noted a significant challenge: If the administration is already willing to ignore court orders, it might also disregard the financial penalties.
Another potential course of action could be criminal contempt charges. These charges are rarer but could involve more serious consequences. However, experts point out that criminal contempt would require action from the Justice Department, which Trump controls. As a result, pursuing criminal contempt charges against the administration seems unlikely. Carl Tobias, a constitutional law professor at the University of Richmond, explained that judges are usually hesitant to pursue criminal contempt charges because they are such an extreme measure. “The threat of sending somebody to jail is sort of a last resort,” Tobias told CNN.
While contempt charges could be a powerful tool, their enforcement would still face significant obstacles. The U.S. Marshals Service, which enforces federal court orders, falls under the Justice Department. This makes it difficult to hold the Trump administration accountable through contempt charges, as the president controls the agency responsible for enforcing those orders.
Despite these challenges, the option of contempt is not without precedent. In 2021, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth held the D.C. jail in civil contempt for failing to provide medical treatment to a U.S. Capitol rioter. While the judge did not impose penalties, he referred the matter to the Justice Department for further action. Similarly, while Presidents ignoring court orders is unusual, it has happened in the past. During the Watergate scandal, President Nixon famously defied a court order to turn over White House tapes, only complying after the Supreme Court ruled that he must do so.
Legal experts suggest that, if Trump were to defy court orders, the most likely consequence would be political rather than legal. Georgetown Law professor David Cole pointed out that the Trump administration has often lost court cases but typically responded by appealing decisions and publicly criticizing the judges. “If the president were to defy an order, it would cause a political firestorm,” Cole said. “And he knows that, so he’s unlikely to do it.”
One key difference between the Trump administration’s previous responses and the current situation is the strong support Trump receives from congressional Republicans. This unwavering support makes it unlikely that lawmakers would use impeachment or other measures to punish Trump for ignoring court orders, even if such defiance occurred.
Even with concerns about potential defiance, some Republicans have defended the legitimacy of the judiciary and rejected the idea that the executive branch should disregard court rulings. Louisiana Senator John Kennedy, a Republican member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, affirmed his respect for the courts, saying, “That’s why God made courts of appeal. That’s why God made the U.S. Supreme Court.”
In the end, while legal experts say judges could apply a Nixon-style approach to compel Trump to obey court orders, the ultimate consequences of defying the judiciary would likely be political, not legal. If Trump were to challenge the courts, it could spark a political crisis, but it remains unclear whether he could face serious legal repercussions without political fallout.
