There are a lot of “Will he or won’t he?” questions swirling around Donald Trump, the most important of which for traders relate to tariffs.
From a broader, societal perspective, though, there’s no such question more important than this one: Will he defy a court order?
Arguably, Trump and his surrogates already have, but not in the sort of out-in-the-open way that’d underscore and validate the sense of existential dread which pervades the discussion among many legal scholars.
Long story short, if Trump simply stops caring about and/or abiding by, what the courts say, then America has a real constitutional crisis on its hands, not the kind of quasi-, “in spirit, but not quite in deed,” constitutional crisis Trump embodies as a matter of course.
On Tuesday, Chief Justice John Roberts appeared to suggest Trump took a step in the direction of triggering a full-blown crisis of American government by effectively demanding the impeachment of a federal judge who blocked his effort to use a centuries-old statute for expeditious deportations.
I assume most readers are familiar with the backstory, but just in case, I’ll recapitulate by way of the editorial from the March 16 Daily.
A few days ago, Trump dusted off what, in the context of America’s still-young republic, counts as an ancient law to deport 238 alleged Venezuelan gang members. The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 hasn’t been invoked since World War II, when the US locked up Japanese-, Italian- and German-Americans. The Venezuelans were flown to El Salvador, where Trump has a buddy in rockstar strongman Nayib Bukele, whose three-year-old anti-gang crackdown is all at once a success story and a human rights flashpoint.
It’s hard to overstate the extent to which Bukele’s tactics transformed El Salvador’s domestic security landscape: The country used to be quite dangerous, now it’s safe. Night and day, so to speak. As a result, Bukele enjoys the highest approval rating of any world leader, including those who don’t permit real surveys (he’s more popular in quasi-legitimate polling than Vladimir Putin is in Russia’s farcical polls, for example).
But Bukele’s methods leave no room for due process, which means that although a majority of those swept up in his dragnet are indeed gang members or affiliates, some invariably aren’t, and they have no legal recourse to speak of. That’s the kind of thing Trump loves, and Bukele knows that, which is one reason he offered to accept (i.e., lock up) anyone Trump wants to deport for a “small” fee.
And so it was that dozens of “heinous monsters,” as White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called the deported Venezuelans, ended up at Bukele’s Terrorism Confinement Center, an enormous facility built to hold tens of thousands of inmates, outside San Salvador. As far as I’m aware, none of the Venezuelans Trump deported were convicted of crimes and none received an immigration hearing. Indeed, they weren’t even named publicly and they reportedly have no access to the outside world, let alone to an attorney, in Bukele’s detention center.
The legality of Bukele’s initial offer to be America’s for-hire jailer was questionable from the get-go, and the problem with testing it the way Trump did is that it’s not obvious how to get the Venezuelans back in the event the American judicial system decides Trump did something unconstitutional. Even if you could get them back, the optics would be terrible for anyone who tried, given that a lot of them probably are dangerous.
As I put it Sunday, this is another one of those Trump ideas which sounds good in very specific circumstances, but not in a broader context. If the question is, “Are we ok with deporting dangerous, Venezuelan gang members to a maximum security facility in El Salvador?” the answer’s probably, “Sure, why not? Particularly if they’re in the US illegally.” But if the question is, instead, “Do we want to give the president — any president — the unilateral authority to throw anybody he or she wants, including, perhaps, US citizens, onto a plane bound for hard confinement with Salvadoran murderers, with no due process and trip, room and perpetual board all paid for by American taxpayers?” the answer’s probably, “No!” Or even, “WTF?!”
As it turns out, a US federal judge (James E. Boasberg) did indeed block Trump’s plan, eliciting a sarcastic rejoinder from Bukele — who wrote, on social media, “Ooopsie. Too late” — and a furious rebuke from Trump, who called Boasberg, among other things, a “lunatic” before insisting he “should be IMPEACHED!!!”
It still isn’t clear whether the Venezuelans Trump flew out were wheels down in El Salvador by the time Boasberg ordered the flights stopped. That matters. Because if they weren’t (wheels down on foreign soil), Trump violated a federal court order and… well, as noted above, that’d be very, very bad.
On Monday, Justice Department lawyer Abhishek Kambli effectively refused to answer Boasberg’s questions about the flight timeline and Trump administration officials, including Pam Bondi herself, suggested, in no uncertain terms, that they intend to keep deporting people under The Alien Enemies Act irrespective of what any court says. Again: That’s problematic.
An alarmed Roberts, writing on Tuesday in an exceedingly rare public statement, reminded Trump (and the nation) that for over 200 years, “it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.” Rather, the administration should use “the normal appellate review process” which “exists for that purpose,” Roberts went on.
Speaking of the appeals process, Trump sent, through the DoJ, a letter to the appellate court above Boasberg demanding his removal for “highly unusual and improper procedures.” To make the obvious joke, and to drive home Roberts’s point: The only people employing “highly unusual and improper procedures” here are Trump and Bondi.
In the simplest terms: It can’t be the case that Trump ignores court orders. Let me emphasize: We, as a citizenry, can’t let that happen.
Today, he’s ignoring a court order that says he might not be able to unilaterally deport dangerous Venezuelans to a maximum security facility in El Salvador using a wartime law. No big deal, you say? I don’t know. Because tomorrow, he might ignore a court order that says he can’t mandate media outlets call The Gulf of Mexico “The Gulf of America” under threat of government seizure. Next month, he might ignore a court order that says he can’t — you know — whatever. Eventually, “whatever” will impact most of us, regardless of how we voted.
I don’t know where Trump thinks he’s going, but if he starts down the road to neutering the courts, and his cabinet goes along with it, America’s in deep, deep trouble. Trump and Elon Musk have already de facto stripped Congress of its most zealously-guarded power: The power to tax and spend. Now, apparently, Trump’s DoJ might start ignoring court orders.
Even The Wall Street Journal‘s Editorial Board understands what’s at stake here. “[Trump] campaigned on deporting gang members,” the Journal said this week. “But he can’t defy court orders.”
Before anyone suggests this doesn’t have implications for markets, consider that what really underpins US Treasurys and the dollar is the rule of law, which is sacrosanct in the strictest, most literal meaning of the word in America. Trump has no respect for the rule of law at all. In fact, he seems to harbor a deep-seated disdain for it.
Let me bring this home to the Wall Streeters among you, and particularly to the fund managers, by way of a simple question: What’s it called when a borrower foists upon some, but not all, of its creditors a change in the terms of the borrower’s debt obligations? More to the point, what would any ratings agency be required to declare in the event Scott Bessent strong-armed America’s allies into swapping their existing US Treasurys for some other sort of instrument in exchange for tariff relief, military protection or some other favor?
“SD.” The answer’s “SD.” I don’t know what the name is for selective default at gunpoint (maybe just “SDAGP”), but that’s what you’d get if Bessent invites America’s erstwhile friends to Mar-a-Lago and says, “Swap this debt for that debt or else,” they say “Or else what?” and Scott replies, “Or else we’ll kill you with tariffs. Or let someone else kill you with bombs.”
That — some manner of debt swap — is part and parcel of a theory which posits a “Mar-a-Lago Accord,” an imaginary (for now) agreement that’d let Trump have his cake and eat it too on a number of fronts.
I’ve heard a lot of commentators swear that private sector holders of US Treasurys could never be forced into accepting such a proposition from Bessent. But what are you gonna do, as a hedge fund manager, when the call doesn’t come from Bessent, but rather from Bondi or worse, from Pete Hegseth? Or from Kash Patel? Think that “can’t happen here”? Bad news: It’s happening right now.
The hope is that, although Bessent is clearly playing along with alot of Trump’s non-sense economic agenda, he is one of the few adults in the room who wouldn’t play along with such a dangerous idea.
Who cares what Bessent thinks if the rule of law isn’t in play. Send him to El Salvador too if he doesn’t go along with the plan.
Hope springs eternal. Did you follow the debate over who to appoint Treasury Secretary? It came down to a battle between Scottie Bessent and Howie Lutnick. They bought off Lutnick with the promise that Bessent would be installed as Fed Chairman at or before Jerome Powell’s term expires, opening up the treasury slot for Lutnick.
Bessent wants the Fed chairmanship so there’s little chance he will stand up against any Trump policy ideas.
He works for Trump and serves at his orders.
Trump thinks capital letters equal LOGIC, JUSTIFICATION, and LEGITIMACY. Also, EXCLAMATION MARKS !!!!!
This certainly seems ruthlessly logical, if the goal was to disobey court orders all along. Now the test case will be “we’re stopping dangerous illegal criminals from coming back.” Who in the general public is expected to have an issue with that? That last section from “Let me” on gets bone-chilling, so thanks again for great reporting.
The section up top was more bone-chilling to me. I’m no Wall Streeter. But I’ve been threatened by cops with guns in my own house for so much as raising my voice a little (so I could be heard over his own barrage of drivel). I’ve got friends and family who are public activists who are in these same crosshairs, on the same kinds of lists. Sure, loss of public confidence in the almighty US monetary system is bad, and I guess this kinda lays that out as a starting place. But it’s not my first worry.
“But when the president does it that means that it is not illegal”
SCOTUS basically confirmed this with Trump v. United States last year. Maybe Roberts will balk at attempts to remove other judges but does anyone think he/at least 5 others will do anything to stop the administration from doing basically anything else.
An opinion piece in The Guardian suggests that Roberts just might step up to try to keep himself from going down in history as the Chief Justice who ended democracy in America:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/18/supreme-court-john-roberts-trump.
The Atlantic doubts that Roberts has the vision or courage for this, though:
“The chief justice is right. Trump’s attack on Boasberg is juvenile, civically illiterate, and perilous to the rule of law. (It was also just an echo of his sidekick Elon Musk’s recent rants about courts.) But the statement is notable for what it leaves out: any acknowledgment of the substantive dispute in the case, which is whether Trump is defying court orders. Roberts seems more concerned about rhetorical attacks on the personal integrity or employment status of judges than he does with systemic attacks on the judiciary as a whole.”
H poses the question as “Do we want to give the President – any President – the unilateral authority to throw anybody he or she wants, including, perhaps, US citizens, onto a plane bound for hard confinement with Salvadorean murderers, with no due process and trip, room and perpetual board all paid for by American taxpayers?”.
Agreed, that’s PART of the question. The other truly terrifying rest of the question is that the people sent to the prison were not named.
The very definition of someone being “disappeared”.
Fifty one seconds, rule book scene from Bridge of spies film.
Needless to say, no one like James B. Donovan will be negotiating at a high level on behalf of the US for some time.
The rule book has always been open to interpretation. Last year in Trump v US the USSC nullified many of the rules that were previously thought to be the most important safeguards of the rulebook itself.
Feel like this movie doesn’t get its due and I’m not a huge Hanks fan.
It’s impossible for me to wrap my mind around our current circumstances. The Republicans have installed a king and an incredibly stupid one at that. The dam has broken and people will have to wake up to the cold reality that the laws they took for granted are no longer relevant.
At the risk of getting myself sent to El Salvador, I hope Father Time does the job that Republicans refuse to do. Even if JD Vance is willing to push the bounds, he does not have the same hold over the Trump cult and it may be our only hope to stop a full-on dictatorship.
I honestly can’t believe it’s come to this. Stupidity and malice are a terrifying combination.
It is happening indeed and faster than most of us expected. Prior to Trump’s electoral victory I announced to close friends my intention to leave the US for fear of a de facto dictatorship, their typical response “it would never happen here,” always struck me as naive in the way only a US born American citizen can be naive. Anyway, I am glad I planned ahead, specially now, as the fact that I am a naturalized US citizen born in Venezuela of all places means the threat of seizure, deportation or worst feels very real, regardless of having been a citizen for almost 2 decades and having zero gang affiliations. I also hold an EU passport which makes me very lucky, I rather face the threat of Putin’s bombs than risk ending incommunicado in a Salvadorian max security prison. For me at least, the American experiment is over.
“naive in the way only a US born American citizen can be naive.” Damn, that’s cold. And accurate.
“That — some manner of debt swap — is part and parcel of a theory which posits a “Mar-a-Lago Accord,” an imaginary (for now) agreement that’d let Trump have his cake and eat it too on a number of fronts.”
To add some context. I’ve read that Mr. Trump toyed with the idea of a selective default his first term but was toweled down by the adults in the room back then. However — a BIG distinction was that he raised the idea not in the context of friends and allies but in the case of US debt owned by China. Perhaps as a chess move against the notion that China might dump their US Treasury bond holdings as a trade deal negotiating tactic. In isolation it was actually an appealing idea.
But it may help explain why central banks around the world have slowly stepped up their buying of gold to replace their dollar holdings in their reserve baskets. Those dollars are not kept in non-interest-bearing accounts. They are typically parked in T-bills or shorter US Treasury notes. Resurrecting this idea would probably ramp up the exodus by other nations which would not be a welcome idea in our bond markets. My God! We’d have to order the Federal Reserve to step in and buy. If Powell resisted, Scott Bessent would be eagerly waiting to take over and do it.
I can’t help but think about David Rogers Webb’s The Great Taking. I mean, sh*t is getting real. Here’s the online pdf for those that have not come across this piece. I’ve read it several times.
https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/1ee786fb-3c78-4903-9701-d614892d09d6/taking-feb24-screen2.pdf
H- thoughts? Is this part of the propaganda you speak of regularly? Or is there meat on the bone?
I don’t know. Never heard of him.
Definite Nostradamus vibes. Given this situation, how would one prepare/position? Clearly, clear out any debt on property you want to keep (cars included). But what else? Stash of gold and silver coins? Cash in the mattress?
Oh damn, the rabbit hole. He links out to a similar/identical stance from The Heartland Institute, which is a hub of climate change denialism/activism and related MAGA-friendly ideals. Thanks for the link, I’ll mull this regardless, but sprinkling some salt along the way.
Has a Russian intelligence operation successfully penetrated the White House?
Precursor to Shotgun Diplomacy
Lots of trees to look at to distract us from the forest. It might be that all this destruction of infrastructure and rule of law is the goal. For what purpose? this might be known by Musk, Putin and, to a lessor extent, their Useful Idiot.
Surprised they haven’t used the “Obama assassinated US citizens oversees without due process” defense yet