The new populist president raised against the judiciary while they were prohibiting his aggressive moves to restructure his country’s government and economy.

This was in Mexico, where former President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador promptedChangesThis requires the election of every judge in his country instead of appointing him. Reforms caused, and he promised more by his successorMarketsTo lose confidence in his country’s reliability as a place for investment, which weakened his currency.

It was one in a series of attacks by populists all over the world on courts in recent years, and legal observers are now wondering whether the United States could be the next.

He also received the courtsA series of setbacksFor his dramatic attempt to change the federal government without the approval of Congress, President Donald Trump’s supporters repeat some of the rhetoric and procedures that preceded attacks in other places on the judiciary.

Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller, who was published last week on X: “Under the precedent that it has now created by Radical Rogue judges, a local court in Hawaii can astrology in the forces of forces in Iraq. Judges do not have the authority to manage the executive authority. Or to cancel the results of the national elections.”

“Either we have democracy,” said Miller, who was running a legal group.

Trump supporters in Congress raised the specter of the dismissal of judges who ruled against the administration. Elon Musk, billionaire Trump Moayad, who was ended in the government efficiency department at the intersection of a lot of litigation, regularly called for the removal of judges on his site on social media, x.

On Sunday, the Chairman of the Senate Judicial Committee, Republican Chuck Grassley, was an angry reaction to the Washington judge to request Shortly for deportation under the eighteenth century of war that Trump protested hours ago.

On another day, another policy is unilaterally decided for the entire country. This time in favor of members of foreign gangs, “” If the Supreme Court or Congress is not suitable, we are heading towards a constitutional crisis. “

Activists claim that it is the administration that increases the prospects of the crisis.

“They do not like what they see in the courts, and this is the creation of what may be a constitutional crisis about the independence of the judiciary,” said Heidi Peres, founder of the global project against hatred and extremism.

“Threats against the Constitutional Government”

Despite the speech, the Trump administration has yet to challenge an order before the court, and dozens of cases against its actions have followed a regular legal path. His administration has not made any moves to request the removal of judges or to pay judicial reforms through Republican congressions.

Justin Levitt, a law professor at Liola Marimaont University and a voting expert who previously worked in the Civil Rights Department at the Ministry of Justice, said he is not a fan of Trump’s movements. But he said that the administration follows legal standards by resuming decisions that you do not like.

“I think most of this is incorrect,” Levit said, noting that the courts can imprison those who do not obey orders or impose fines that paralyze this daily. “If this is the approach that the executive authority wants, it will raise a fight. Not everyone is satisfied with being wiped in the way in which Congress is.”

Even if there are no fixed moves to remove judges or ignore their rulings starkly, the speech was not noticed by anyone inside the judiciary. Two senior judges appointed by Republicans warned last week of the increasing danger of targeting the judiciary.

“The threats against judges are threats against the constitutional government. Judge Richard Sullivan, who was appointed in his first term in the New York Federal Appeal Court:” Everyone should take this seriously, “said Judge Richard Sullivan, who was appointed in his first term in the New York Federal Appeal Court:” Everyone should take this seriously. “

Targeting judges “authoritarian instinct”

In Mexico, Lopez Oberrador was named outside his post last year. But many other popular allies Trump who have not shown any tendency to leave power made judicial lovers a central goal.

Hungary Victor UrbanReducing the mandatory retirement age for judges to impose some of those who may have prevented his agenda. In Brazil, supporters of former President Gere Bolsonaro stumbled with the Supreme Court in that country. After it was BolsonaroChargedWith an attempt to cancel his 2022 election loss, his party hopes to win enough seats in the elections next year to dismiss one of the judges at least. In El Salvador, President Naib’s party has removed the Supreme Court judges who clashed with them.

I wake upBokley wrote on X, “If you do not remove the corrupt judges, you cannot repair the country,” in the wake of a position, Mousse urged to follow the leadership of Al -Salvadori.

“This is an essential authoritarian instinct. You cannot have democracy as the elected government can do what it wants,” said Stephen Levitsky, co -author of “How Democrats die” and a political scientist at Harvard University.

It will take two -thirds of the US Senate to remove a isolation judge. With only 53 Republicans in the room, the great generations are unlikely. Nevertheless, the Trump administration expressed its discontent with the frequency of the minimum courts against it.

American presidents have long clashed with the courts

Saturday night, the judge prevented a tour of the deportation of the people whom Trump officials claimed to be members of the gang, although the administration is over.DeportationMore than 200 anyway. Another judge student in San Francisco in the administrationrehabilitationTens of thousands of federal workers who are incorrectly ruled will be launched. ManagementresumeMany of the rulings that make their efforts to end the constitutional guarantee of the Citizenship consumed to the Supreme Court.

The administration is still fighting with relief organizations that claim that the government did not comply with the matter of the Federal JudgePay to themThe work that was implemented under a contract with the United States Agency for International Development.

“You have these minimum judges who are trying to prevent the president’s agenda. Caroline Levitt, a spokeswoman for Trump, said on Friday, adding that the judges had issued 16 requests that block Trump compared to 14 against Biden during the previous four years.

The presidents have been known for examining it by the courts for decades. Biden complained that the courts prevented his efforts to tolerate student loans. Former President Barack Obama has warned the majority of maintaining the United States Supreme Court of cancellation of historical health care expansion.

In the thirties of the twentieth century, President Franklin Dylano Roosevelt at the time tried to expand the number of seats in the Supreme Court to get rid of the most conservative majority, an idea that some Democrats wanted to reconsider during the Biden presidency.

Respecting the courts is the basis of the rule of law

But experts, the anti -judicial speech did not reach decades to the stadium he is now. One of the reasons for this is that Trump has issued more orders than any other new president. Many of them rely on new legal theories about the presidential authority that contradicts or not tested in court.

Ann Marie Silter, a former official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Obama administration, compared the judges in sports who impose the rules. She said that the United States has long defended the importance of the rule of law in small democracies and helped to create legal systems in countries ranging from India to South Africa to ensure free survival.

“At this stage, I think that many of our allies and our peer country are deeply anxious and no longer see a beacon of democracy and the rule of law.”

Rafal Bankovsky, a Polish activist, called for mass protests that followed new requirements set by the Perspectional and Justice Party in the country on the judges in 2019. They also directed.PenaltiesFrom the European Union to intervene in judicial independence.

Bankovsky said that these demonstrations contributed to the party’s loss of power in the following elections.

“Over time, it has become difficult for people to follow the technical aspects of the legislation, but the instinct to defend the independence of the judiciary was one of the main things behind the democratic movement,” Pankovsky said.

This story was originally shown on Fortune.com

https://fortune.com/img-assets/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/AP25061752053033-e1742209377100.jpg?resize=1200,600
2025-03-17 11:04:00