, an expert in public law and public administration, said history offers insight into ramifications of any potential clash between our nation’s judiciary and President Donald Trump.
Wise is faculty emeritus at the John Glenn College of Public Affairs and author of the 2024 book “.”
For a very long time, he said, judicial review was supportive of presidential directives, but in more recent times those rulings have been more restrictive.
As of now, courts have issued temporary restraining orders preventing implementation to allow time for court hearings on Trump’s policy orders. If the courts eventually decide against them on constitutionality or federal statute grounds, the president and federal agencies will have to decide whether to comply. If they decide not to comply, Wise said, then it could be termed that we have a Constitutional crisis, and the courts will have to decide what to do to try to enforce its orders. Officials of agencies refusing to comply could be held in contempt of court and face court-ordered penalties including professional discipline, fines or even jail time. That could precipitate a clash between federal law enforcement agencies who have to enforce the order. The resulting public reaction would affect whether the administration will pursue its actions.
Wise said the tension between the president and the courts has implications for presidential, Congressional and federal agency policymaking. Presidents, their appointees and administrative agencies who want to implement new policy may need to first determine how specific statutes authorize them to do so. If there’s not a clear statute of a previous decision by Congress, then the administration will need to get that approval from Congress before proceeding.
While obtaining Congressional authorization through the lawmaking process involves more than one branch and can be complicated, the country’s founders never meant for government to be simple, Wise said.
“That’s what the whole checks and balances system was about,” he said. “They wanted it to be complicated, for very good reason. They thought this would produce deliberative action in which proposers of legislation had to demonstrate widespread public support, and that any threats to people’s freedom would be stopped in such a process.”
Wise, who teaches federal policy and management to students in the Glenn College’s Master of Public Affairs-Washington, D.C., program, has published extensively in public administration journals and law reviews. In 2024 he published the book “,” which analyzes the evolution of federal judicial treatment of presidential directives and the legal bases and principles employed in federal court decisions. It also illuminates the implications for presidential, congressional and federal agency policymaking. Wise also served in the United States Department of Justice, first as special assistant for policy analysis in the Office of Legislative Affairs and then as director of Intergovernmental Relations for the department.
RSS