Trump’s Second Term: Slapped Down by Federal Judges, Including Chief Justice Roberts
Donald Trump may have clawed his way back to the White House, but his second term has been anything but smooth sailing—especially in the courtroom. Despite his efforts to wield the judiciary as a political weapon, federal judges, including Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, have repeatedly rejected his overreach, reminding the country that no president is above the law.

Trump vs. The Rule of Law: A Losing Battle
From the moment Trump reclaimed the presidency, his legal troubles followed him. While he tried to use executive power to shield himself from investigations into his business dealings, election interference, and obstruction of justice, the courts have refused to grant him immunity.

One of Trump's biggest legal setbacks came when he attempted to pardon himself preemptively for any crimes committed before and during his presidency. A federal appeals court swiftly struck it down, ruling that “no constitutional framework exists for a president to pardon himself.” Even the Supreme Court, with its conservative majority, declined to hear the case, leaving the ruling in place.

Additionally, Trump’s efforts to crack down on political dissent and weaponize the Justice Department have been met with judicial resistance. His executive orders restricting protests, targeting political opponents, and expanding surveillance powers have repeatedly been blocked in court, often by judges appointed by previous Republican administrations.

Roberts: The Unexpected Roadblock
While Trump has long expected loyalty from conservative judges, Chief Justice John Roberts has emerged as a consistent roadblock to his most extreme policies. Roberts has previously ruled against Trump on issues like DACA and the Affordable Care Act, and his stance hasn’t softened in Trump’s second term.

One of the biggest clashes came when Trump attempted to defy a Supreme Court ruling limiting executive power over independent agencies. Roberts, writing for the majority, firmly rejected Trump’s attempt to ignore the decision, stating that "the rule of law is not optional."

Roberts has also played a key role in preventing Trump from using emergency powers to sidestep Congress. When Trump declared a national security emergency to push through policies that had been blocked legislatively, Roberts sided with a 6-3 majority ruling that the move was unconstitutional.

Trump’s Fury and the Courts’ Resistance
Trump’s response to these rulings has been predictable—furious rants on social media, personal attacks on judges, and threats to reshape the judiciary. However, his attempts to bully the courts into submission have largely failed. Even Trump-appointed judges have ruled against him in key cases, showing that lifetime judicial appointments do not guarantee blind loyalty.

As Trump’s legal battles continue, one thing is clear: The judiciary remains one of the last checks on his power. Despite his attempts to consolidate control, the courts—led in part by Chief Justice Roberts—continue to serve as a barrier between Trump and the authoritarian rule he seeks.

Would you like any additions or changes?