Trump's iron grip is weakening. Loses control of the Supreme Court. Subsequent decisions may be painful for him
Trump prevailed in all but a few of the roughly 30 emergency appeals filed last year to the Supreme Court in cases covering a wide range of issues, from immigration to mass layoffs of federal workers to the abrupt withdrawal of billions of dollars of federal grants and contracts.
Critics, including some liberal justices, argued that the Supreme Court was too compliant and treated any negative lower court ruling on Trump's policies as an emergency requiring immediate action.
“I don't think this administration will be able to do as well in court in the future as it has over the last 14 months,” said Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University and a prominent critic of the way the court handles cases in the so-called shadow docket mode [czyli nadzwyczajnej procedurze sądowej, gdzie decyzje podejmowane są w trybie pilnym, bez pełnego procesu sądowego].
Legal experts say that as the court shifts from hearing urgent appeals to hearing cases in the more time-consuming ordinary proceedings, the administration will likely face more resistance from judges.
“It will be much more difficult and the administration will win some cases, but it will also lose others,” said Roman Martinez, who clerked for Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh when the latter was an appeals court judge.
— The most important lesson is that the court will be more skeptical of the administration in cases with a “merits docket” [takich, które przechodzą przez pełny proces sądowy]than in the case of “shadow docket” cases, he adds.
John Sauer's secret weapon
One of the key factors that probably will cause more problems for Trump in the Supreme Court, is his lawyers' loss of control over which cases reach the judges' desks. When the administration's early actions were blocked by federal judges, Solicitor General John Sauer decided which cases to take to the Supreme Court on an emergency basis and which to let proceed at a slower pace in lower courts.
As Sauer's team faced a barrage of injunctions from district court judges, Justice Department lawyers prioritized cases where they had a good chance of obtaining emergency relief.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Solicitor General John Sauer (left) speak on the Supreme Court's overturning of most of his tariffs during a press conference at the White House, February 20, 2026.SHAWN THEW / PAP
Other cases, some of them high-profile, were not brought to court on an urgent basis. Significantly, the administration waived the ability to file emergency appeals to the Supreme Court against orders that blocked Trump's actions against Harvard University and his attempt to exclude several well-known law firms.
“If you just look at the win-loss numbers, yes, the administration did quite well for most of 2025, but the mix of cases was not random,” says Martinez, who served in the attorney general's office during the Obama administration. — This was a collection of cases that President Trump's legal team decided to take to court. And these lawyers were smart and selective in choosing to appeal in cases where their position was inherently stronger, he adds.
A more difficult task
As cases progress, the choices facing the government become increasingly difficult, and officials are often forced to decide between taking a risk in the Supreme Court or abandoning a policy altogether. In addition, cases that come to court on an urgent basis often come back for full proceedings and arguments.
— Earlier in the process, the general counsel may in some sense dominate the discussion. However, when the cases later come back to court, he loses much of his control – notes Vladeck.
As this process unfolds, Sauer may continue to try to influence which cases go to trial, but he may not always be successful.
A clear example of this occurred last month, when the Trump administration informed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that it no longer intends to seek reinstatement of President Trump's executive orders targeting specific law firms — executive orders that were unanimously blocked by district court judges.
The move, which required Sauer's approval, would have prevented a potentially unfavorable appellate court ruling in the case. However, the next day, the Justice Department changed course and announced that it would continue to appeal. He did not provide the court with any explanation for the change, but as The Wall Street Journal reported, Trump claimed he was never consulted about the decision to withdraw.
A White House official, who was granted anonymity, says the original filing was an oversight. — No final decision was made and the application was submitted inadvertently, which has been corrected, the official adds.
Justice Department spokespeople did not respond to a request for comment.
Sauer suggested he realizes that this year He faces a more difficult task in the Supreme Court than in Trump's first year in office.
During a justices conference last September, Sauer joked that he now faces the “terrifying” prospect of full trials in all the emergency cases in which Trump won victories in the first months of his term. -Who will handle all these matters? Sauer asked.
