Staff Reports
In a display of classic bureaucratic overreach, President Trump’s Justice Department is making It clear to the Supreme Court that lower courts shouldn’t be allowed to derail his agenda, especially not during those tantalizing early days of his presidency. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris argues that a district court cannot just issue a temporary restraining order impeding a president’s choice to replace key agency heads. President Trump’s decision to fire Hampton Dellinger, who has the prestigious title of head of the Office of Special Counsel, is at the heart of this unfolding drama.
DOJ tells Supreme Court to let Trump fire Biden appointee to whistleblower protection agency Hampton Dellingerhttps://t.co/mw8WZX2ExN pic.twitter.com/hdwgjYFhDg
— The Washington Times (@WashTimes) February 20, 2025
The narrative here is simple: take a moment to consider a bureaucrat appointed by Biden attempting to hold Trump’s presidency hostage from day one. Dellinger, who was given his five-year term by the previous administration, has the audacity to sue after Trump made the perfectly reasonable move to fire him. Dellinger contends that he can only be removed for “cause,” whatever that means in the world of government jobs where incompetence is often rewarded.
Over the weekend, the Trump administration wasted no time and went right to the Supreme Court, seeking to halt a lower court’s directive that reinstated Dellinger while his lawsuit plays out. The crux of this situation is the Justice Department’s claim that district courts are intruding on the authority of the executive branch, which is a fancy way of saying judges need to stay in their lane.
According to the Justice Department, allowing a temporary restraining order to stand would significantly hinder the President from shaping the agenda of executive agencies, particularly when he’s just taken office and is eager to cut the federal government down to size. The argument is that a restraining order shouldn’t be a tool for district courts to wield to halt any and all presidential actions, especially not for an entire month.
The clash between Trump and the judiciary over executive power is expected to be just the beginning. It’s become a trend for activist judges to attempt to impose their will on the duly elected President’s agenda, even in the earliest stages of his administration. With the Supreme Court now weighing in, the stakes are high. The administration is standing firm, pushing back against a pattern of judicial overreach—a fight that most conservatives can wholeheartedly cheer for.
