Yet this cycle, Donald Trump seems to me to be categorically worse because of his mix of narcissism and disdain for norms. Simply put, Trump sees everything through the lens of how it affects or reflects upon him, and he values—or denigrates—institutions, customs, and people accordingly.
I share others’ concerns about the many ways Trump might abuse the powers of that office in a second term, including weaponizing the Department of Justice against political opponents; deploying troops to suppress dissent under the Insurrection Act; and even refusing to step down at the end of his term on one pretext or another. But another scenario has received less attention than I think it merits: the possibility of President Trump openly defying a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The judiciary famously lacks the power of the purse or the sword. Its ability to serve as the final arbiter of disputes over constitutional limits on government flows entirely from the acquiescence of political actors who obey those decisions as a matter of custom, not compulsion. I see three reasons to fear that Donald Trump might well be the first president to explicitly repudiate that norm.
First, Trump’s recent experiences as a civil and criminal defendant have likely solidified his view that the legal system is a fundamentally rotten institution with no more authority or legitimacy than some zoning board standing between him and his latest real-estate development project. Second, Trump would be a lame-duck POTUS with good reason to believe he can—again—win a game of impeachment-chicken with Congress. It’s reasonable for him to suppose there would be no practical consequences if he tells Chief Justice John Roberts and company to pound sand.
Finally, Trump learned two important lessons from his first administration and particularly from January 6: the importance of surrounding himself with conniving rogues who value their own political ambitions more than the Constitution, and just how many there are to choose from in this town.
