Trump Attacks Supreme Court After Losing on Tariffs, Facing Birthright Citizenship Defeat

President Trump went after the Supreme Court on Monday in a rambling social media tirade, attacking the justices for ruling against his tariff scheme and signaling they might strike down his executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship.

"It's too bad that the Supreme Court can't watch and study the Mark Levin Show tonight on the Birthright Citizenship Scam," Trump wrote on Truth Social, referring to the Fox News pundit whose legal analysis apparently now outranks constitutional precedent. "If they saw it they would never allow that money making HOAX to continue."

The president's meltdown came after the Court ruled against his tariff policies and after oral arguments last week revealed deep skepticism among justices about his birthright citizenship order. Trump claimed the Court "failed miserably on Tariffs, needlessly costing the USA Hundreds of Billions of Dollars in potential rebates for the benefit haters and scammers."

That framing conveniently ignores how Trump's own tariff policies have hammered American consumers and businesses with higher prices while sparking retaliatory measures from trading partners. The Supreme Court's rejection of his tariff overreach was a rare check on executive power run amok.

Constitutional Revisionism on Fox News

Trump's attack leaned heavily on arguments from Mark Levin, who claimed during his Sunday Fox News show that birthright citizenship "was never mentioned in the Constitution." Levin said he'd "looked at the invisible ink" and couldn't find it, dismissing Supreme Court justices as lawyers "in black robes who think they're really smart" who "get carried away with themselves."

This is constitutional fan fiction. The 14th Amendment explicitly states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." That language has been interpreted consistently for 125 years to grant citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' immigration status.

Levin argued the amendment's authors couldn't have intended to cover children of undocumented immigrants because immigration restrictions didn't exist in 1868. That's a bizarre claim that would rewrite constitutional interpretation based on what laws happened to exist at the time of ratification rather than the plain text of the amendment itself.

Supreme Court Skepticism

During oral arguments last week, the justices raised pointed questions about Trump's executive order. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked whether mothers would need to produce documentation at hospitals to prove their babies deserved citizenship. Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned how Native Americans would be categorized under the new regime.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer, arguing for the administration, appeared uncertain when pressed on these practical implications. That uncertainty reflects the legal chaos Trump's order would create if implemented.

Trump has spent years claiming birthright citizenship is a "scam" and a "money making HOAX," though he's never explained who exactly is profiting from constitutional guarantees of citizenship. The real scam is his attempt to unilaterally rewrite the 14th Amendment through executive fiat.

Authoritarian Tantrum

Trump's Monday post concluded with what amounted to a threat: "The Country can only withstand so many bad decisions from a Court that just doesn't seem to care." He urged the justices to "USE THEIR POWERS OF COMMON SENSE FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY" -- in other words, to ignore 125 years of precedent and constitutional text to give him what he wants.

This is how authoritarians talk about independent judiciaries. When courts rule against them, it's not because the law doesn't support their position. It's because judges "don't care" about the country or are part of some conspiracy.

The irony is that Trump appointed three of the current justices specifically because he expected loyalty. Their willingness to even question his birthright citizenship gambit suggests the legal arguments are so weak that even ideologically sympathetic judges can't stomach them.

Trump's tariff policies have already cost American families billions in higher prices while enriching connected corporations through carve-outs and exemptions. His birthright citizenship order would create a two-tiered system where citizenship depends on proving your parents' legal status at birth. Both policies reflect an administration more interested in exercising raw power than governing within constitutional constraints.

The Supreme Court's job is to interpret the Constitution and check executive overreach. Trump's tantrum suggests they might actually do that job, at least on birthright citizenship. His anger is the sound of a would-be autocrat discovering that some institutions still won't bend to his will.