Donald Trump doesn’t have a “get-out-of-law-free” card.
That was the principle affirmed on Friday by a 2-1 majority of the D.C. Circuit, affirming a lower court’s preliminary injunction blocking construction of a proposed ballroom in the East Wing of the White House.
“The bold assertion that the Executive can act with utter lawlessness, destroying treasured national landmarks and harming the interests of individuals, and that no court can stop it flouts our constitutional order,” U.S. Circuit Judges Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia wrote. “And it is no basis on which to claim the favor of courts’ equitable judgment. While this court accords great weight and deference to invocations of national security and the safety of the President, such arguments are not an automatic get-out-of-law-free card.”
During a discussion on Substack Live, former federal prosecutor Harry Litman and I explained why this fight is highly likely to go up to the Supreme Court, which will likely focus on a theory of standing that can dramatically expand Trump’s power.
That became clear during oral arguments: Flouting a hypothetical, Judge Millett asked whether any court could intervene if Trump decided to raze the Statue of Liberty. The government’s position was clear: No judge could block such an action. Archconservative dissenting Judge Neomi Rao appeared to agree with that position, and the Roberts Court could be asked to weigh in on the question soon.
Later in the conversation, Harry Litman and I discussed the dismissal of the indictment against Olympic athlete David Hearn and what comes next.
Watch the archived video at the top of this newsletter, and read the D.C. Circuit’s ruling here.
