Republican strategist Scott Jennings said during a CNN appearance that the Trump administration should ignore federal court rulings that don’t fall in line with the president’s policy objectives, prompting host Abby Phillip to shoot back that his argument was “not connected to the facts.”
“If a district court judge tries to usurp the authority of the chief executive of this country, he should absolutely defy it,” Jennings told a panel on Monday‘s CNN NewsNight.
“There’s a difference between broad policy decisions and discrete disputes between parties. That’s the difference. If I want a policy decided, I’ll take it to the Supreme Court.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Republicans have expressed outrage over recent judicial rulings that held up disputed efforts by President Donald Trump’s billionaire lieutenant Elon Musk and his federal spending task force DOGE.
In one case, a judge ruled to pause their access to the U.S. Treasury’s payments system, pending an upcoming hearing, and in another a judge halted a Musk-driven effort to fire thousands of staffers from the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Top Trump officials have led the charge against those rulings: Musk personally called for the immediate impeachment of the judge who ruled to limit his team’s access to the Treasury system.
Vice President JD Vance outright declared, in a social media post: “Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”
Those defiant gestures trickled down to Republican surrogates, too, Jennings’ appearance on CNN made clear.
As Phillip questioned the hardline stance on USAID, noting Congress had already approved the agency’s funding, Jennings increasingly took offense.
“When the court says Congress appropriated this money, you must unfreeze it while we litigate this, why can’t Trump comply with that?” she asked.
“You’re saying that a judge should decide how and when money is spent,” he replied.
That led Phillips to try and emphasize her point—“let me explain it a little bit more slowly”—that she was referring to the factual record of a judge’s ruling, not an opinion.
That appeared to upset Jennings, who told her, “You don’t have to talk to me like that.”
“Yeah, but I’m saying listen to me because you’re not listening, and you’re making claims that are not connected to the facts,” Phillips replied. “The judge is saying Congress appropriated a certain amount of money. We need to litigate this. While we litigate this, we’re going to put a hold on the actions that you took that might be unconstitutional.”
Jennings then claimed a ruling to pause an execution action was tantamount to a judge being in “charge of the executive branch”
“Forget it, I totally disagree,” he said.
Fellow Republican and former New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu held the party line, jumping in to claim: “You just can’t compel the executive branch to spend the dollars. You can’t do that.”
But Phillip then played them both a clip of Russell Vought, Trump’s White House budget chief, testifying at his Senate confirmation hearing that it would be unconstitutional for the president not to spend money appropriated by Congress.
Phillip and Elie Honig, CNN’s senior legal analyst and a onetime federal prosecutor, both noted a federal law that explicitly says the president can’t block money allocated by Congress.
“I understand the frustration people have when a district court judge blocks a broad mandate from the chief executive, the elected chief executive,“ Honig told the GOP surrogates. ”Ultimately, the big issues go up to the Supreme Court.“
“But I would ask both of you, what if a district court judge had blocked Barack Obama’s DACA plan? The Dreamers plan, right? And he said, ‘Heck with you, I’m doing it anyway.’ Would you be OK with that?”
