What If Trump ‘Simply Ignored’ a Supreme Court Ruling? Law Professor Warns of Unprecedented Threat

Stephen Vladeck, a Georgetown University Law Center professor, is raising an alarming question: What if former President Donald Trump, should he return to office, decides to ignore a United States Supreme Court ruling outright? Writing in the New York Times, Vladeck argues that the risk of Trump defying a Supreme Court decision is stronger than ever, especially given recent events that have affected the Court’s credibility and public standing.

Vladeck’s argument highlights an important but often overlooked trend from Trump’s first term—the frequency with which the Supreme Court intervened to halt or modify his administration’s policies. “The Supreme Court hits the brakes on proposed Trump policies more often than it’s given credit for during his first term in office,” he observes, pointing out that the judicial system has played a significant role in checking Trump’s executive actions.

However, Vladeck believes the Court’s ability to maintain its authority over a potential Trump administration may be at risk due to its recent rulings, which he says have alienated portions of the American public. The most notable example, he argues, is the Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, a controversial ruling that has led many to question the Court’s credibility and legitimacy. This, he suggests, could embolden Trump, should he return to power, to disregard any ruling he finds disagreeable, a scenario that previously might have been “largely unthinkable.”

“Without that public support, what would happen if Mr. Trump simply ignored a decision by the nation’s highest court that he doesn’t like?” Vladeck asks, inviting readers to consider the unprecedented implications of such a scenario. Adding weight to his argument, Vladeck references statements made by Vice President-elect J.D. Vance, who in recent years has openly supported Trump disregarding court rulings that limit his power.

Vance has even drawn parallels to former President Andrew Jackson, who famously ignored the Supreme Court’s authority in his defiance of a ruling related to Native American land rights. This precedent, according to Vladeck, might provide Trump’s administration with historical justification for ignoring court rulings, should it choose to do so.

One critical factor, Vladeck suggests, is that Trump would be constitutionally ineligible for a third term if elected in 2024. This restriction might free him from concerns about public backlash that would typically deter a sitting president from disregarding the Court’s authority. Trump, he argues, may feel less compelled to worry about how such defiance could affect his future in politics.

Vladeck goes on to emphasize the fragile nature of judicial power, pointing out that the Supreme Court’s authority ultimately depends on a public belief in its legitimacy and mutual respect between government branches. “Judicial power is fragile… the entire system is jeopardized when the courts lose their ability to stand up to the other institutions of government,” Vladeck writes, underscoring the necessity of maintaining public trust in the judiciary.

He argues that the Court must take public perception seriously, even during times of relative calm, as its credibility could become crucial during moments when “the rule of law is directly threatened.” In Vladeck’s view, the possibility of a sitting president ignoring a Supreme Court ruling would test the resilience of the U.S. legal system like never before. His article serves as both a cautionary warning to the Supreme Court about maintaining its public support and a call for vigilance about the potential dangers of a Trump administration willing to challenge the judiciary’s authority head-on.