JD Vance Declares the Judiciary Irrelevant
JD Vance vs the Constitution.
Vice President JD Vance has decided that judges have no business checking the President’s power.
In a post on Twitter, Vance opined that “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power”—a bold stance that legal experts have noted directly contradicts, well, the entire U.S. Constitution.
Vance, clearly frustrated with courts slamming the brakes on Trump’s executive orders, decided to go full constitutional originalist—but with a plot twist: The executive branch should be allowed to do whatever it wants, unchecked.
Apparently, the separation of powers was a great concept until it got in the way of Trump’s agenda.
The Constitution? Never Heard of It
Constitutional scholars, Democratic lawmakers, and just about anyone with a basic understanding of American government were quick to point out that the judiciary’s job is to check executive power.
James Madison, one of the guys who actually wrote the thing, famously warned that blending powers would crush liberty like a soda can under a MAGA boot.
But according to Vance, the courts should step aside and let the executive branch have free rein, as if constitutional law were just an annoying Terms & Conditions pop-up before absolute power.
“JD Vance is saying the quiet part out loud: the Trump administration intends to break the law,” said Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, proving once again that being from Yale doesn’t necessarily mean you understand the rules of democracy.
Legal analysts have taken turns dunking on Vance, with MSNBC’s Katie Phang quipping, “Yale Law wants its degree back,” and former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance calling his argument “ridiculous.”
If constitutional interpretation were an Olympic sport, JD Vance would have just faceplanted off the balance beam.
DOGE, Elon Musk, and the Great Legal Tantrum
Vance’s remarks come amid mounting legal challenges to Trump’s agenda, particularly over the mysterious new “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE), which has definitely been named with a straight face and not by a Reddit meme lord.
The administration is upset that courts are slowing down DOGE’s attempt to access Treasury databases.
The case has also drawn in none other than Elon Musk, who has somehow found himself entangled in the legal fray because of course he has.
Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermeule echoed Vance’s frustration, claiming that “judicial interference with legitimate acts of state” violates separation of powers—apparently forgetting that checking power is literally what the judiciary is there for.
Make It Make Sense
• JD Vance’s Argument: Judges should not interfere with the executive branch, because that would be bad.
• The Constitution’s Argument: The judiciary exists specifically to interfere when the executive branch oversteps.
• Reality: If courts weren’t allowed to check the president’s power, Trump could legally declare every Wednesday “Barron Trump Appreciation Day” and have DOGE personally deliver NFTs of himself riding a bald eagle to every American household.
The Final Verdict
While courts are currently halting parts of Trump’s agenda, the cases are crawling up the judicial ladder toward the Supreme Court—which, with its conservative majority, may ultimately hand Vance and Trump the unchecked power they crave. Until then, Vance will continue auditioning for the role of America’s most aggressive constitutional revisionist, and legal scholars will continue wondering whether he actually read the Federalist Papers or just skimmed the CliffsNotes.
Za-Head