As the Trump administration contends with mounting legal blockades, Vice President JD Vance claimed that judges do not have the authority to direct the executive branch, a statement many saw as a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution.
If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.
If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal.
Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.
— JD Vance (@JDVance) February 9, 2025
Sunday morning, Vance—a graduate of Yale law school—took to X to state that a judge can’t tell a general how to conduct a military operation or the attorney general how to use discretion as a prosecutor, claiming judicial efforts to control the executive branch of government “would be illegal.”
Critics from across the political spectrum, including lawmakers, legal experts, and journalists, reminded Vance that the judiciary serves as a crucial check on executive power.
“You don’t get to rage-quit the Republic just because you are losing. That’s tyranny,” Former Representative Liz Cheney wrote bluntly. Representative Sean Casten (D-IL) likened his remarks to the words of a “mad king,” while former Representative John Yarmuth suggested Yale Law School—Vance’s alma mater—”should be embarrassed.”
They didn’t teach us much law at Yale Law School but one thing I do remember is that actually when the executive branch violates the law, the judiciary is fully entitled (and obligated) to command the executive branch to behave legally https://t.co/R8Sz44HfcN
— Nathan J Robinson (@NathanJRobinson) February 9, 2025
Legal experts weighed in as well, emphasizing that the judiciary’s role is to ensure the executive branch operates within the bounds of the law. “The judiciary makes sure that the executive follows the law. If you do, then you won’t have problems,” Daniel Goldman, a former federal prosecutor and current congressman, explained. Others, like journalist Aaron Parnas, raised concerns that Vance’s comments signaled the administration’s intent to “disregard the judiciary if they don’t agree with a ruling.”
This is the most dangerous tweet on the internet and sets the Trump Administration up to disregard the judiciary if they don’t agree with a ruling. https://t.co/YBsBSYKbGC
— Aaron Parnas (@AaronParnas) February 9, 2025
Vance’s assertion on the limits of judiciary power follows a series of lawsuits blocking various actions from the Trump administration. Last week, a Judge blocked Trump’s federal employee buyout program hours before its deadline, and another temporarily prevented the termination of thousands of USAID workers. Legal action was also brought against Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) after the agency was granted access to the Treasury’s payment systems. The administration’s anti-immigration efforts also face a number of legal challenges.
Adam Schiff (D-MA) echoed growing concern from critics of the administration, which has issued a dizzying array of executive orders and floated ambitions that include taking over the Gaza strip. “Ignoring court decisions we don’t like puts us on a dangerous path to lawlessness,” Schiff cautioned.
Originally published by Latin Times.
