'You don’t have to talk to me like that!' CNN panel melts down over Trump’s executive power

11 February

A CNN panel on Monday delved into the potential “constitutional calamity” awaiting the United States if the Trump Administration defies court orders from federal judges — which, some scholars argue, he's apt to do. During the segment, host Abby Phillip and guests clashed with Republican strategist Scott Jennings over the scope of Trump's executive power.

The panel was discussing reporting that indicates Trump is looking to defy court motions related to the two-term president's implementation of a spate of executive orders.

“Legal guru” and CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig honed in on the distinction between a “constitutional crisis” and normal government function, suggesting it’s “not a constitutional crisis for a new president to come in and issue a spate of executive orders, even if liberals hate those executive orders."

“[It's] also not a constitutional crisis for scores of federal judges to block some or all of those," he continued. “That is the way our system is supposed to work."

“What happens next?” The CNN legal analyst asked. “We don’t have an answer to that. We are not at that point yet.”

Honig noted the Trump administration has gotten “a slew of really bad rulings” and is “making a lot of noise” about defying them.

Phillip pointed to an order from Rhode Island Chief District Judge John James McConnell Jr., who on Monday ruled the White House “has been violating his order to resume funding federal grants,” Politico reports. The CNN host asked Honig if that violation amounts to outright defiance from the administration.

READ MORE: 'Strategic bluster' or 'full-blown constitutional crisis'? Analysis warns of Trump’s 'nuclear option'

Honig replied that McConnell's order and the government response can be chalked up as “technical disputes,” which the analyst explained “are not uncommon in cases.”

Still, Honig pointed to a recent tweet by Vice President JD Vance that claimed “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power." A constitutional law expert on Monday argued Vance is floating a constitutional battle that "will define Trump’s presidency."

Phillip noted Vance’s use of the word “legitimate” is “doing a lot of work here.”

Strategist Jennings, agreeing with Vance, claimed the actual “constitutional crisis” is actually “caused by” federal judges.

READ MORE: Judge 'hints at possibility of contempt' for Trump officials 'violating' order to resume funding: report

“Correct political control is between the executive and the Congress, not some federal judge,” Jennings said, later insisting he wants to “let the Supreme Court" decide on the constitutionality of Trump's directives.

“Pray tell, how do we get to the Supreme Court?” Phillip asked. “Can somebody tell me?”

Jennings then brought up former President Joe Biden’s fight with the Supreme Court over student debt relief.

“‘The Supreme Court tried to stop me but they never will, but they never will!'” Jennings said, ostensibly quoting the former president.

“Who said that?" Jennings demanded. "Biden!”

Honig, the CNN “legal guru,” retorted that while he, personally, “hated the student loan forgiveness policy,” and thought it was "ridiculous” and “unconstitutional,” Biden did not ignore the courts and instead “went and tried under a different law.”

“So he ignored it,” Jennings retorted as the panel erupted in protests.

Asked by Honig how a president should reply to a court order, Jennings claimed if a judge “tries to usurp the authority of the chief executive of this country, [the president] should absolutely defy it.”

READ MORE: Judge says he’ll consider Arizona fake electors’ free speech defense

“If I want a policy decided, I’ll take it to the Supreme Court!” Jennings insisted.

Phillip then took issue with Jennings' “bizarre, broad generalities,” disputing the GOP strategist's notion that the courts are issuing “broad swaths of policy" over the president's head.

“When the court says, ‘Congress appropriated this money, you must unfreeze it while we litigate this,’ why can’t Trump comply with that?” Phillip asked.

“Saying that a judge should decide how and when money is spent and not the president of the United States!" Jennings exclaimed.

READ MORE: Trump quietly fired head of office that protects whistleblowers: new lawsuit

“Let me explain it a little bit more slowly,” Phillip replied.

“You don’t have to talk to me like that,” Jennings shot back. “I have a position on this, you have an opinion, we can disagree.”

“Listen to me on this, because you’re not listening, and you’re making claims that are not connected to the facts,” Phillip said.

“Maybe you are,” Jennings retorted.

READ MORE: Trump to stop enforcement of law banning bribery of foreign officials

Watch the videos below or at this link.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

From Your Site Articles