Trump Again Condemns His Supreme Court Nominees As Too Cowardly To Agree With Him

Reason · collected 2026-09-15 · by Jacob Sullum
Read the original at Reason ↗

Summary

President Donald Trump criticized his Supreme Court appointees—Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett—on Truth Social for what he deemed as political cowardice in rejecting a request for an emergency stay of a U.S. Postal Service plan to screen mail-in ballots. The immediate cause was the court's decision against Trump’s application on Monday regarding USPS v. California. Trump views his appointees' rulings against him not as legal disagreements but as a lack of courage, attributing their decisions to fear rather than principled judgment.
Written by the local model on 2026-09-15, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event.

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
33
claim-shaped sentences
Uncertain
12%
4 of 33 hedged
Leaning
Leans left
of the writing, not the subject
Correction & hedging signals
92.4
corrections and hedging in what we collected; not a measure of accuracy
Outlets on this story
unclustered
not grouped into a story yet
Narrative spread
1
articles carrying this framing
Analyzed 2026-09-15 · how these are computed

AI analysis (generated at analysis time, not now)

Why this leaning score
The article's own words the score was based on. Each is quoted verbatim and was checked against the article text before being stored, so you can find it in the original.
Score -0.45 Confidence high
Leaning score -0.45 for article 12173 (high confidence, 2 verified quotes) · logged 2026-09-15

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Compared with similar articles

Nothing to compare against. No article is close enough to this one for the pipeline to have linked or judged the pair.

Publisher

Reason · 164 article(s) · 1 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 1 correction(s)
2026-09-05
Lawyers' Responsibility for Hallucinations in Briefs That They Sign

Who wrote this

Jacob Sullum
11 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 Although "there is at least a fair prospect" that the Postal Service would win on the merits, he said, "applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections."
🔮 If the 5th Circuit agrees with Squire on that point, Judge Stephen Higginson warned in July, when the appeals court agreed to rehear the case, it will "have massive import for federal law," undermining "much of the United States Code."
🔮 Although most of the beer was boxed, a six-pack "was packed only in a grocery bag and would have been in plain view to Jouppi as he was loading the airplane," the Alaska Supreme Court noted last year.
🔮 "The founders would have been astonished at the claim that legislatures may ban arms in common use if those arms can also be used for military purposes," he writes.
🔮 The Institute for Justice has identified "well over 100" such incidents, which it notes "may be just the tip of the iceberg" given the reality of lax oversight and widespread data sharing.
🔮 Reps. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.) and Eric Burlison (R–Mo.) this week introduced the Flock-Off Act, a bill that would bar federal funding of automated license plate readers (ALPRs) except at the border or for toll enforcement.
🔮 During its next term, the Supreme Court will address the long-simmering question of whether "assault weapon" bans are consistent with the Second Amendment.
🔮 But as he could have discovered if he had bothered to investigate Castro's claims, the ICE officer's account was inconsistent with video and physical evidence.
🔮 The advisory, which describes the sort of information that criminals could glean from the back of your car, suggests you might be endangering yourself and your family with stickers that reveal potentially sensitive details about your life.
2026-08-31 · assertive framing · The Belated Backlash Against Flock Cameras
🔮 The case illustrates how the war on drugs invites police mendacity that may go undetected for years thanks to lax supervisors and credulous courts.
Also by Jacob Sullum
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 11 articles by Jacob Sullum →

Topics

Court U.S. Postal Service the Postal Service the Supreme Court the United States Supreme Court

Subjects

Trump PERSON · 7× America GPE · 4× the Supreme Court ORG · 3× Court ORG · 2× Democrats NORP · 2× Republican NORP · 2× U.S. Postal Service ORG · 2× the Postal Service ORG · 2× Brett Kavanaugh PERSON · 1× Donald Trump PERSON · 1×

Narrative

The Court's inability and unwillingness to do the right thing for our Country will go down, in a very negative way, in the annals of History." It seems unlikely that historians will rank the Supreme Court's decisions rejecting Trump's illegal tariffs and his assault on the 14th Amendment alongside Dred Scott v. Sandford, Plessy v. Ferguson, and Korematsu v. United States.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-15
🔮 Although "there is at least a fair prospect" that the Postal Service would win on the merits, he said, "applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections."

Claims (33 extracted, 4 hedged)

On Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump slammed his own picks for the Supreme Court, condemning them as both cowardly and "highly political." asserted
Trump → slam → them
Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett "are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court," he wrote on Truth Social. asserted
he → interview → Social
Trump wanted the Court to block a preliminary injunction against implementation of a U.S. Postal Service plan to screen mail-in ballots, the result of an executive order he issued in March. asserted
he → want → March
That plan was necessary, he said, as "a solution to our totally CORRUPT and out of control Mail-In voting 'disaster,' which is a laughing stock all over the World." asserted
which → say → World
But while he was on the subject of "horrible" Supreme Court decisions, he reiterated his complaints about its rulings against his "emergency" tariffs and his attempt to restrict birthright citizenship. asserted
he → reiterate → citizenship
Trump's latest tirade against his nominees reflects his general attitude toward judicial review, which he sees as an illegitimate obstacle to his policy agenda and personal whims. asserted
he → reflect → agenda
As the president tells it, Trump appointees do not rule against him because they honestly disagree with his legal positions. asserted
they → tell → positions
Rather, they are "totally unable to show the courage necessary to save our America" because they "are petrified of these crazed and depraved Democrats." asserted
they → show → Democrats
It is a character defect, as opposed to a careful consideration of the facts and the law, that explains their failure to side with him. asserted
that → oppose → him
That take is counterintuitive, to say the least. asserted
take → say → least
According to Trump, it requires courage for justices to agree with the president who appointed them, while cravenness is the only possible explanation for failing to do so. uncertain
cravenness → accord → them
"The Government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the District Court's preliminary injunction," the Supreme Court said on Monday, when it declined to issue a stay in U.S. Postal Service v. California, the mail-in ballot case. asserted
it → succeed → California
"And the equitable factors applicable for obtaining emergency relief from this Court do not favor a stay." asserted
factors → obtain → stay
Kavanaugh wrote a short concurring statement. asserted
Kavanaugh → write → statement
Although "there is at least a fair prospect" that the Postal Service would win on the merits, he said, "applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections." asserted
officials → be → elections
Seven justices, in other words, did not think a stay was appropriate, either because the Postal Service had probably exceeded its legal authority or because trying to implement the rule now would disrupt the elections. asserted
trying → think → elections
But according to Trump, those rationales were disingenuous. uncertain
rationales → accord → Trump
As he explained after the tariff ruling in February, the three Democratic nominees on the Supreme Court "automatically vote no" because they are "against anything that makes America strong, healthy, and great again." asserted
America → explain → anything
And the Republican nominees who vote against him are, if anything, even more contemptible: They are "fools and lapdogs for the RINOs and the radical-left Democrats." asserted
They → vote → RINOs
They "may think they're being politically correct," but "they're very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution." uncertain
they → think → Constitution
Or as he put it in Tuesday, they are "bullied and cajoled by the Radical Left into making decisions that have set America back at least a hundred years." asserted
that → put → America
At the same time, Trump described the order in the Postal Service case as "highly political." asserted
Trump → describe → case
"It is a big loss for Republicans, and America itself," he said, because it "makes cheating by the Radical Left 'Dumocrats,' on Mail-In Ballots, a much easier thing to do." asserted
cheating → say → Ballots
The implication that the Republican appointees (presumably including Chief Justice John Roberts as well as Trump's nominees) were eager to facilitate such Democratic chicanery seems inconsistent with the equally implausible claim that they were intimidated into compromising their party's interests. uncertain
they → include → interests
For Trump, the main point is that his nominees, regardless of their motivation, have betrayed him, which means they have betrayed their country. asserted
they → betray → country
"Their horrible decision on Tariffs will be costing the U.S.A., for many years to come, Trillions and Trillions of Dollars," he said. asserted
he → cost → Dollars
This Court "will go down as having rendered some of the most destructive, hurtful, and damaging decisions in our Country's history," Trump declared. asserted
Trump → go → history
Those "shockingly bad rulings," he said, are "of such magnitude that it won't be easily possible for our Country to recover or heal. asserted
Country → say → magnitude
Do Trump's nominees care? asserted
nominees → care → ?
They do not! asserted
They → do → ?
"The damage done to America is incalculable, and they know this, just as everyone else does," he said. asserted
he → do → this
The Court's inability and unwillingness to do the right thing for our Country will go down, in a very negative way, in the annals of History." It seems unlikely that historians will rank the Supreme Court's decisions rejecting Trump's illegal tariffs and his assault on the 14th Amendment alongside Dred Scott v. Sandford, Plessy v. Ferguson, and Korematsu v. United States. asserted
historians → go → States
But they probably will be struck by this president's open contempt for the crucial role that an independent judiciary plays as a safeguard against tyranny. asserted
judiciary → strike → tyranny
💬 Give feedback
🕘 History 🎫 Support