Democratic politicians are up in arms over the Trump administration's decision to freeze federal funding despite a court order from U.S. District Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island.

McConnell accused the administration of defying his January 31 order to continue the funding in response to a lawsuit filed by Democratic attorneys general in 22 states and Washington, D.C.

'They have clearly overstepped their boundaries, but unlike the other two branches, they have "neither force nor will" to effectuate their usurpations.'

The judge claimed the Trump administration "continued to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement of appropriated federal funds."

On Monday, McConnell ordered the administration to comply with his previous order.

"The broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the Court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country," the district judge wrote.

Democratic politicians and the corporate media were in lockstep this week, parroting the claim that the Trump administration's actions amount to a "constitutional crisis."

However, neither the Democratic Party nor its media allies expressed such concerns in the past when left-wing politicians ignored and even, in some cases, blatantly defied court orders.

1. Biden buys votes with student loan scheme

In June 2023, the Supreme Court struck down former President Joe Biden's sweeping federal student loan "forgiveness" plan, declaring it unconstitutional. The initiative would have eliminated $10,000 of debt for individual borrowers earning less than $125,000 per year and married couples earning less than $250,000 per year. An additional $10,000 would have been zeroed out for Pell Grant borrowers.

The plan would have cost American taxpayers roughly $430 billion.

The Supreme Court justices determined in a 6-3 vote that the Biden administration overstepped its authority with the unconstitutional student loan debt cancellation plan.

Additionally, two reports from the Government Accountability Office found that Biden's student loan cancellation program automatically approved borrowers without proper vetting and failed to implement fraud protection safeguards.

Despite the Supreme Court's ruling and the GAO's findings, the Biden administration decided to move forward with its pledge to cancel federal student loan debt.

The administration rolled out a series of similar but smaller initiatives.

In February 2024, Biden boasted about his attempts to circumvent the Supreme Court's decision.

"Early in my term, I announced a major plan to provide millions of working families with debt relief for their college student debt," he stated. "Tens of millions of people in debt were literally about to be canceled in debts. But my MAGA Republican friends in the Congress, elected officials, and special interests stepped in and sued us. And the Supreme Court blocked it."

"But that didn't stop me," Biden declared. "I announced we're going to pursue alternative paths for student debt relief for as many borrowers as possible."

2. Biden's CDC tramples property rights during COVID era

In 2020, Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, which included "a 120-day moratorium on eviction filings as well as other protections for tenants in certain rental properties with federal assistance or federally related financing."

When Congress chose not to extend the moratorium, the Biden administration's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention attempted to step in. It ordered a halt on evictions that broadly included all residential properties in the country and imposed criminal penalties for those who violated the order.

Congress extended the CDC's order for an additional month. However, when that expired, the agency issued a second extension. Initially set to expire in March 2021, the extension was prolonged multiple times, with the final expiration date set for July 2021.

In June 2021, the Supreme Court considered the CDC's order and ultimately allowed it to stand because it was slated to expire in a few weeks, allowing time for Congress to distribute rental assistance funds.

However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote, "I agree with the District Court and the applicants that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its existing statutory authority by issuing a nationwide eviction moratorium."

He noted that further extensions would need to be issued by Congress.

Biden's CDC ignored the court's opinion, issuing another order in August 2021, attempting to extend the expired eviction moratorium to residential properties in communities with "substantial" and "high" levels of COVID-19 transmission. However, the order was blocked by the Supreme Court.

Again, the justices wrote, "The CDC has exceeded its authority."

"It would be one thing if Congress had specifically authorized the action that the CDC has taken. But that has not happened," the order read.

3. Bucks County Democrat pledges to count illegal votes

Bucks County Board of Commissioners Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia, a Democrat, boasted that she planned to count illegal ballots in Pennsylvania's Senate race between incumbent Bob Casey (D) and Dave McCormick (R) in November.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered that undated and misdated mail ballots could not be counted.

Ellis-Marseglia stated that she planned to count the ballots despite the court's order.

"People violate laws any time they want," she said. "So for me, if I violate this law, it's because I want a court to pay attention. There's nothing more important than counting votes."

After Ellis-Marseglia's comments, the state's supreme court ordered a second time that such ballots could not be counted.

Fierce community blowback prompted Ellis-Marseglia to quickly backpedal on her earlier comments. She claimed that her words were taken out of context.

She issued what appeared to be a half-hearted and insincere apology, arguing that many were unaware that she was referring to provisional, not mail-in, ballots.

Many Bucks County residents attended the subsequent commissioners' meeting to demand Ellis-Marseglia's immediate resignation.

Ellis-Marseglia was elected in 2007 and remains on the board.

4. Sanctuary city mayors shield illegal aliens

In President Donald Trump's first administration, he issued an executive order in January 2017, "Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States," that sought to prevent sanctuary jurisdictions from thwarting federal immigration enforcement measures.

As part of Trump's executive action, he aimed to pull federal funding from jurisdictions that failed to comply with immigration laws.

"It is the policy of the executive branch to ensure, to the fullest extent of the law, that a State, or a political subdivision of a State, shall comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373," it read. "In furtherance of this policy, the Attorney General and the Secretary, in their discretion and to the extent consistent with law, shall ensure that jurisdictions that willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373 (sanctuary jurisdictions) are not eligible to receive Federal grants, except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes by the Attorney General or the Secretary."

8 U.S.C. § 1373 states, "Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual."

It also prohibits federal, state, and local laws from restricting the exchange of immigration status information with "any other Federal, State, or local government entity."

In 2003, the Immigration and Naturalization Service mentioned in the law was broken up into three federal agencies: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Customs and Border Protection.

Trump's executive order to withhold federal funding from sanctuary jurisdictions faced many legal challenges during his first term, and the courts blocked it. However, sanctuary cities were ordered to comply with 8 U.S.C. § 1373.

Regardless, cities like Chicago, New York City, and many others continue to shield illegal aliens from federal immigration agents.

5. Cuomo attacks religious freedom

In October 2020, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, rolled out strict lockdown measures, claiming they would stop the spread of COVID-19.

The heavy-handed restrictions limited church capacity in Brooklyn and Queens, neighborhoods experiencing high infection rates at the time. Churches in so-called "red zones" were prohibited from hosting more than 10 attendees, while "orange zones" were limited to 25.

Cuomo's executive order prompted several religious groups — the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and two Orthodox Jewish congregations — to file a lawsuit against the city.

Rabbi David Zwiebel of Agudath Israel of America called the restrictions "very devastating to communities of faith."

The lawsuit argued that Cuomo's restrictions discriminated against religious practices while allowing higher capacity limits for so-called "essential" business. The groups further contended that the First Amendment protected their religious freedoms.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the religious organizations.

Cuomo responded by calling the ruling "irrelevant."

"It's irrelevant from any practical impact because the zone that they were talking about has already been moot," he stated. "I think this was really just an opportunity for the court to express its philosophy and politics."

Executive branch under siege

Democratic leaders invested considerable time and effort in thwarting Trump's first administration, and his second term is already shaping up to follow a similar pattern.

Attempts have been made to block Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship. On Tuesday, a federal judge ordered the administration to restore the websites of the CDC and the FDA after they were taken offline to remove references to radical, woke gender ideology. Congressional Democrats have also tried to slow-walk the confirmation of Trump's Cabinet nominees.

These actions paint a picture of an executive branch battling a growing trend of encroachment by other branches of government.

GianCarlo Canaparo, a senior legal fellow in the Heritage Foundation's Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, told Blaze News, "American government no longer respects the separation of powers that the Founders envisioned."

"On the one hand, Congress has improperly given legislative power to the executive, and on the other judges too often interfere with the executive's proper powers," Canaparo stated. "I would like to see Congress take back its legislative power from the president and for the president to be able to exercise his executive powers free from unconstitutional restraints."

Daniel Horowitz, host of the Blaze Media podcast "Conservative Review with Daniel Horowitz," told Blaze News, "There is no way a Democrat president would tolerate a court dictating that they must have information about abstinence education on their website."

"Courts rule on ordinary civil and criminal litigation. They do not set broad policy over issues affecting the whole of the people, and they do not dictate appropriations, personnel decisions, which data Trump's staff can access, and how they run their websites," Horowitz continued. "They have clearly overstepped their boundaries, but unlike the other two branches, they have 'neither force nor will' to effectuate their usurpations."

"Democrats have already plowed the ground of demonstrating how impotent a judge is in determining political decisions, and Trump should apply the same standard. What's next? Will a judge put an injunction on Trump's ultimatum to Hamas?" Horowitz added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!