OPINION: Federal judges make America great again
Photo via United States Court of Federal Claims/Public domain/Wikimedia Commons
Written by Amelia Henson and Alaina Sayre
Amelia Henson & Alaina Sayre, Freshmen studying Journalism, argues that the inclusion of federal judges in the lawmaking process is what will return American democracy to its former heights.
The Trump administration has done a phenomenal job of overwhelming the citizens of the United States. It seems every day there is more bad news, whether it is a social media edit of deportations or an executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.
As of March 28, President Donald Trump has signed 107 executive orders during his current term alone. To put that into perspective, former President Joe Biden signed 162 during his entire presidency.
Some of Trump’s executive orders have been completely nonsensical. One executive order in particular was created to “end the procurement and forced use of paper straws” in federal buildings. Trump explained his distaste for paper straws with, “These things don't work. I've had them many times, and on occasion, they break, they explode.”
The Trump administration seemingly intends to overload news outlets with nonsense executive orders in order to distract from the actual damage they are doing. Although some of his orders seem silly, others have already created significant damage. Fortunately, the checks and balances system in our country has succeeded in shutting down executive orders that are deemed unconstitutional.
The federal courts have many different branches. These branches include, but are not limited to: the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, and the District Judges. These judges are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
All federal judges have the right to block an executive order. A judge may block an order on the grounds that it is unconstitutional or that the president does not have the power to issue such an order. Executive orders can also be reversed by a law enacted by Congress, or a future president can issue an executive order that revokes the previous order.
The following are cases in which federal courts have slowed or blocked Trump’s tyrannical executive orders.
PAUSE ON FOREIGN AID
On day one in office, Trump signed an executive order intending to suspend all foreign aid for 90 days. Trump and his administration have been clear on their intent to dissolve the U.S. Agency for International Development, and this executive order was just the first step. Head of the Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk, referred to USAID as a “criminal organization” and said it’s “time for it to die.”
Musk is the richest man in the world with a net worth of $342 billion — over $100 billion more than the second richest man, Jeff Bezos—and holds enough money to solve world hunger by 2030 and still retain approximately $102 billion. USAID’s comparatively modest $42 billion budget is dedicated to alleviating poverty, combating world hunger and so much more.
The dismantling of USAID would leave hundreds of thousands of people completely defenseless. Impact Counter, a real-time digital tracking website that quantifies the big-picture impacts of U.S. policy change, estimates that as of April 1, over 160,000 people have died worldwide due to U.S. funding discontinuation.
Fortunately, after almost a month of lawsuits and cases throughout the country, the Supreme Court ordered the government to release the $2 billion in withheld payments that were due to the affected organizations. However, the fight is still ongoing. The Trump administration is still successfully gutting USAID, and it is entirely up to the courts to stop it. On March 28, the Trump administration notified Congress of its intent to dissolve USAID and redistribute certain functions into the existing departments.
BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP
Many of Trump’s executive orders have left citizens in a panic, such as his executive order to end birthright citizenship. The order states that any person born in the United States to parents who are not legal citizens, or whose parents were in the country temporarily. The order titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship” was signed on Trump’s first day of office.
The order caused many people to fear for their own citizenship and the citizenship of future children. Birthright citizenship was originally established by the 14th Amendment, passed in 1866. Birthright citizenship is a pillar of American democracy.
Although the executive order was signed, it has not been enforced. The order has been blocked by four federal judges, and three separate appeals courts have declined to unblock those orders. One judge who blocked the order, John Coughenour, said, “The rule of law is, according to him, something to navigate around or something ignored, whether that be for political or personal gain.” The Judge goes on to say, “In this courtroom and under my watch, the rule of law is a bright beacon, which I intend to follow.”
Federal judges who have stood up to Trump by blocking this order have shed light on the importance and power of checks and balances. Not all of Trump’s executive orders will be set in stone; there is still power that lies elsewhere, beyond the hand of the president.
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to narrow the lower court orders. If the Supreme Court complies with Trump’s request, it would allow the administration to begin putting the order into effect. As of now, every court that has reviewed his order has blocked it.
GENDER-AFFIRMING CARE
On Trump’s eighth day in office, he signed an order titled “Protecting Children From Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” This order takes action to end gender-affirming healthcare for children. This threatens federal funding for institutions that provide research and care for transgender youth.
The order will limit access to gender-affirming care for families who are covered by Federal Employee Health Benefits. People who have FEHB will not receive coverage for “pediatric transgender surgeries or hormone treatments.” Along with FEHB, TRICARE would also have to take action to “exclude chemical and surgical mutilation of children.” Additionally, the order states that the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall take action to end the “chemical and surgical mutilation of children.”
Unfortunately, putting gender-affirming care on the chopping block will have intense repercussions on LGBTQ+ youth. More than 90% of trans youth live in states that have proposed or passed laws restricting their rights. Additionally, 39.4% of them live in states with outright bans on gender-affirming care. Banning gender-affirming care is detrimental to the mental health of trans youth. Having access to gender-affirming care, such as hormones or puberty blockers, was associated with a 60% lower chance of depression. Moreover, anti-transgender laws lead to a 72% increase in suicide attempts among transgender and nonbinary youth.
In February, a federal district court in Baltimore issued a temporary block on the executive order. Following the ruling in Baltimore, another district judge granted a temporary restraining order after the Trump administration was sued by Democratic attorneys general of Oregon, Washington and Minnesota.
The judges who have blocked Trump’s executive orders have proved that there are still people within the government who are willing to fight against Trump’s administration. Checks and balances have been a staple of our government for as long as our country has existed. Throughout the last two months, citizens have regained hope in our democratic system, but the fight won’t be over any time soon. Our future of democracy lies entirely in our courts' oath to protect the Constitution.
Please note that these views and opinions do not reflect those of The New Political.
