Justices Walking ‘Tightrope’ With Modest Trump Victories

The US Supreme Court’s attempt to avoid a confrontation with President Donald Trump has real world costs, said Georgetown Law professor Stephen Vladeck.

Vladeck spoke with “Cases and Controversies” hosts Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr about the flurry of recent rulings from the justices in emergency requests involving the administration’s policies.

_{Listen here and subscribe to Cases and Controversies on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Megaphone, or Audible.}

The majority of the justices have been careful not to be overly critical of the president and have at times granted him “modest procedural wins,” Vladeck said. But those efforts have real world costs, he added.

Vladeck pointed to the court’s recent action, lifting a temporary pause on the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members.

“The question is, how long can the justices get away with walking this tightrope before they’re actually sacrificing too much in the name of not unduly provoking the confrontation with Trump,” Vladeck said.

Audio produced by David Schultz.

Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases and Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.