White House Reacts to 'Constitutional Crisis' Claims

Live News Reporter

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt criticized court rulings against President Donald Trump's administration on Wednesday, claiming they stem from "judicial activists" whose decisions pose a "constitutional crisis."

"Many outlets in this room have been fear-mongering people into believing there is a constitutional crisis taking place here at the White House," Leavitt said. "I've been hearing those words a lot lately. But in fact, the real constitutional crisis is taking place within our judicial branch, where district court judges in liberal districts across the country are abusing their power to unilaterally lock President Trump's basic executive authority."

Why It Matters

Federal judges have temporarily blocked many of Trump's actions regarding immigration, federal spending, and other issues, setting the stage for a protracted legal battle and raising alarm over the looming power struggle between the executive and judicial branches.

The showdown has recently intensified as the president and other senior administration officials and allies step up attacks on federal judges. Critics warn of a potential constitutional crisis.

What To Know

During Wednesday's press briefing, Leavitt remarked, "Many outlets in this room have been fear-mongering the American people into believing there is a constitutional crisis taking place here at the White House...but in fact, the real constitutional crisis is taking place within our judicial branch."

"We believe these judges are acting as judicial activists rather than honest arbiters of the law," Leavitt said. "They have issued at least 12 injunctions against this administration in the past 14 days, often without citing any evidence or grounds for their lawsuits. This is part of a larger concerted effort by Democrat activists and nothing more but the continuation of the weaponization of justice against President Trump."

Trump's administration has been hit with a slew of lawsuits since he took office for the second time on January 20. The Associated Press reported that there have been more than 50, with judges blocking some of his administration's moves at least temporarily.

Leavitt said the injunction rulings "have no basis in the law" and "have no grounds."

Three lawsuits were filed against the Department of Government Efficiency in Washington, D.C., within minutes of Trump being sworn in. All three accuse the department of violating the Federal Advisory Committee Act, a 1972 law that requires federal advisory committees to follow specific transparency rules.

The state of Maryland and three other groups sued the Trump administration on February 3, asking a federal court to declare the executive orders outlawing diversity, equity and inclusion unconstitutional.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in a Washington, D.C. federal court on February 4. The lawsuit claims that Trump's order around allowing border immigration officials to turn away asylum seekers is "unlawful as it is unprecedented."

At Trump's request, acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Benjamine Huffman issued a policy guidance that instructs the Department of Justice to take action against so-called "sanctuary cities" that prevent the arrest of illegal immigrants. A group of Chicago-based immigrant groups filed a lawsuit in late January, stating that the attorney general's guidance violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the First Amendment.

Attorneys general from 22 states also filed a lawsuit arguing that Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents violates the 14th Amendment.

In late January, the National Treasury Employee Union launched a lawsuit in Washington, D.C., against Trump's executive order to strip policymaking federal employees of the legal guarantees that protect them from political purges.

Seven individuals filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration on Friday in the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts, accusing the State Department of denying passport applications from transgender citizens or issuing documents that fail to reflect their gender identity.

On Tuesday, Trump said he would comply with the courts but also suggested he would consider some kind of response to the judges. He called their actions a "violation."

"It seems hard to believe that a judge could say, 'We don't want you to do that.' So maybe we have to look at the judges because that's very serious. I think it's a very serious violation," he said.

What People Are Saying

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, at Wednesday's press conference: "Quick news flash to these liberal judges who are supporting their obstructionist efforts: 77 million Americans voted to elect this president, and each injunction is an abuse of the rule of law and an attempt to thwart the will of the people. As the President clearly stated in the Oval Office yesterday, we will comply with the law and the courts, but we will also continue to seek every legal remedy to ultimately overturn these radical injunctions and ensure President Trump's policies can be enacted."

Noah Bookbinder, the CEO of Citizens For Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, one of the plaintiffs in Democracy Forward's lawsuit against DOGE, in a statement: "Americans deserve to know their government is functioning fairly, transparently and without undue influence from Donald Trump's billionaire friends or other special interests."

The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, the American Association of University Professors, the Restaurant Opportunities Centers United and Baltimore City, in a lawsuit: "In the United States, there is no king."

A lawsuit by an anonymous plaintiff, O. Doe, and the advocacy group La Colaborativa: "By purporting to unilaterally strip the targeted citizens of their right to citizenship, the EO violates the Fourteenth Amendment and corresponding statutory protections. And because the EO treats the targeted citizens as a subordinate caste of native-born Americans, entitled to fewer rights, benefits, and entitlements than other Americans due to their parents' alienage, it also violates their right to equal protection under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment."

Massachusetts resident and plaintiff Reid Solomon-Lane, in the transgender passport case, said in a statement: "I thought that 18 years after transitioning, I would be able to live my life in safety and ease. Now, as a married father of three, Trump's executive order and the ensuing passport policy have threatened that life of safety and ease. If my passport were to reflect a sex designation that is inconsistent with who I am, I would be forcibly outed every time I used my passport for travel or identification, causing potential risk to my safety and my family's safety."