Recent court orders slowing down or indefinitely blocking President Donald Trump바카라 게임 웹사이트�s policy blitz have raised the specter that the executive branch might openly flout the federal judiciary and prompted questions about how judges would respond.Any decision by the administration to defy federal courts would immediately implicate profound constitutional questions about separation of powers that have kept each branch of the government in check for centuries. That바카라 게임 웹사이트�s in large part because it would test the power of courts to enforce rulings that are supposed to be the final word.The issue reached a fever pitch on over the weekend when the Trump administration deported hundreds of alleged gang members to El Salvador despite a federal judge바카라 게임 웹사이트�s order that the 19th Century Alien Enemies Act could not be used.Asked on Sunday night whether his administration had violated the judge바카라 게임 웹사이트�s order, Trump replied: 바카라 게임 웹사이트�You바카라 게임 웹사이트�d have to speak to the lawyers about that.바카라 게임 웹사이트�Legal experts say there are few options to force compliance with its pronouncements. Judges could hold an agency or official in civil or criminal contempt 바카라 게임 웹사이트� but that바카라 게임 웹사이트�s about it.Fears that the Trump administration might deliberately break into a pattern of not following judicial rulings with which it disagrees were amplified last month when a federal judge in Rhode Island, for the second time, told the Trump administration it can바카라 게임 웹사이트�t cut off grant and loan payments after Democratic-led states complained that the administration wasn바카라 게임 웹사이트�t obeying the judge바카라 게임 웹사이트�s previous court order.A day earlier, Vice President JD Vance also created a storm of criticism when he questioned in a post on X whether courts can block any of Trump바카라 게임 웹사이트�s agenda. 바카라 게임 웹사이트�Judges aren바카라 게임 웹사이트�t allowed to control the executive바카라 게임 웹사이트�s legitimate power,바카라 게임 웹사이트� he wrote in part.Video below: Trump defends deportation of immigrantsThe most likely response by a court if the administration were to defy its edict would be to hold the agency acting in defiance of an order or ruling in civil contempt, which would allow a judge to levy fines on the government for its non-compliance, experts told CNN.바카라 게임 웹사이트�So you fine whoever the relevant defendant is, whether it바카라 게임 웹사이트�s secretary of the Treasury or some other official, and the fines escalate (as the non-compliance continues),바카라 게임 웹사이트� said Michael Dorf, a constitutional law professor at Cornell Law School.But the issue with that, Dorf added, is that the agency or official might also ignore the imposed fines.바카라 게임 웹사이트�If they바카라 게임 웹사이트�ve been willing to defy the order in the first place, they might be willing to defy the sanctions order,바카라 게임 웹사이트� he said.For the moment, the Justice Department has taken the usual approach of appealing to a higher court on preliminary injunctions that have blocked various executive actions. The Alien Enemies Act has already been appealed to the D.C. U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.Asked at the White House last month whether he바카라 게임 웹사이트�ll comply with court rulings, Trump said that he will.바카라 게임 웹사이트�Well, I always abide by the courts, and then I바카라 게임 웹사이트�ll have to appeal it 바카라 게임 웹사이트� but then what he바카라 게임 웹사이트�s done is he바카라 게임 웹사이트�s slowed down the momentum, and it gives crooked people more time to cover up the books,바카라 게임 웹사이트� Trump said. 바카라 게임 웹사이트�So yeah, the answer is I always abide by the courts, always abide by them. And we바카라 게임 웹사이트�ll appeal, but appeals take a long time.바카라 게임 웹사이트�Other formal sanctions by a court, though grounded in a deep history, also come with a host of potential problems when applied to the executive branch. Should a judge decide to pursue criminal contempt, for instance, it would need to be initiated by the Justice Department 바카라 게임 웹사이트� meaning it바카라 게임 웹사이트�s highly unlikely given the president바카라 게임 웹사이트�s control over that department. The U.S. Marshals Service, which enforces federal court orders, is also part of the Department of Justice.바카라 게임 웹사이트�Judges are very leery of using that 바카라 게임 웹사이트� and maybe appropriately so 바카라 게임 웹사이트� because it바카라 게임 웹사이트�s such a hammer. The threat of sending somebody to jail is sort of a last resort,바카라 게임 웹사이트� said Carl Tobias, a constitutional law professor at the University of Richmond School of Law.Judges holding government entities or officials in contempt is not unheard of. In 2021, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth in Washington, D.C., held the city바카라 게임 웹사이트�s jail in civil contempt but did not impose any sanctions. The judge, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, instead referred the jail to the Justice Department for potential civil rights violations after it failed to get treatment for a U.S. Capitol rioter who needed surgery.And presidents not complying with court orders, while novel, is also not unprecedented. Then-President Richard Nixon famously defied a court order to turn over White House tape recordings during the Watergate investigation. He ultimately did, but only after the Supreme Court ruled that he needed to hand them in.Punishment could be political, not legalDavid Cole, a Georgetown Law professor who has repeatedly argued cases before the Supreme Court on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union, predicted that the most likely penalty a president would face for defying a court order would be political 바카라 게임 웹사이트� not legal.바카라 게임 웹사이트�The response,바카라 게임 웹사이트� Cole predicted, 바카라 게임 웹사이트�would be to punish the Republican Party.바카라 게임 웹사이트�But Cole noted that during Trump바카라 게임 웹사이트�s first term, the White House frequently lost major legal disputes, complained loudly about the judge who issued them and then did what every previous administration has done after losing: appeal.Despite 바카라 게임 웹사이트�a lot of norm-breaking,바카라 게임 웹사이트� Cole said he believed people are overreading Vance바카라 게임 웹사이트�s post on X and other past statements.바카라 게임 웹사이트�If the president were to defy an order, it would cause a political firestorm,바카라 게임 웹사이트� Cole said. 바카라 게임 웹사이트�And he knows that, and he바카라 게임 웹사이트�s therefore very unlikely to do it.바카라 게임 웹사이트�Dorf said that the difference between how the Trump administration responded to adverse court rulings during the first term and now is 바카라 게임 웹사이트�the complete acquiescence of congressional Republicans to Trump.바카라 게임 웹사이트�That support, he said, forecloses the possibility that Congress might use its impeachment power to punish Trump or others for potential non-compliance with a court order.Some Republicans have defended the role of the federal judiciary or pushed back on the idea that the White House might defy rulings hamstringing Trump바카라 게임 웹사이트�s agenda.Among them is Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy, a Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, who said last month that he supports the 바카라 게임 웹사이트�legitimacy of the federal judiciary바카라 게임 웹사이트� and the judicial process.바카라 게임 웹사이트�I바카라 게임 웹사이트�ve disagreed with opinions before,바카라 게임 웹사이트� he said. 바카라 게임 웹사이트�That바카라 게임 웹사이트�s why God made courts of appeal. That바카라 게임 웹사이트�s why God made the U.S. Supreme Court.바카라 게임 웹사이트�