{"id":887104,"date":"2026-01-22T20:27:45","date_gmt":"2026-01-23T02:27:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/2026\/01\/22\/potential-disaster-averted-as-bid-to-undermine-judicial-branch-fails\/"},"modified":"2026-01-22T20:27:45","modified_gmt":"2026-01-23T02:27:45","slug":"potential-disaster-averted-as-bid-to-undermine-judicial-branch-fails","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/newsycanuse.com\/index.php\/2026\/01\/22\/potential-disaster-averted-as-bid-to-undermine-judicial-branch-fails\/","title":{"rendered":"Potential Disaster Averted as Bid to Undermine Judicial Branch Fails"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n WASHINGTON, DC – OCTOBER 07: United States Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts poses for a…<\/span>
\n WASHINGTON, DC – OCTOBER 07: United States Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts poses for an official portrait at the East Conference Room of the Supreme Court building on October 7, 2022 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court has begun a new term after Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was officially added to the bench in September. (Photo by Alex Wong\/Getty Images)<\/span>
\n MORE <\/i><\/span>
\n LESS <\/i><\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
\n

\n INSIDE: Hannah Dugan … Stephen Miller … Jeffrey Epstein <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM\u2019s Morning Memo.<\/p>\n

Editor\u2019s Note: Don\u2019t miss the news at the end of today\u2019s Morning Memo about the first-ever Morning Memo Live event.<\/em><\/p>\n

A Trojan Horse Case<\/h2>\n

A Trojan horse Freedom of Information Act case<\/a> in which Stephen Miller\u2019s old group was trying to get a court to declare that the administrative functions of the judicial branch are part of the executive branch<\/a> has been dismissed<\/a> by U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden of D.C., a Trump appointee.<\/p>\n

This case, which has been covered by my colleague Josh Kovensky<\/a>, had the potential to provide a legal basis for the Trump White House to exercise considerable control \u2014 or at least pressure \u2014 over the judicial branch. There was never any indication that the White House had any hand in the case, but it didn\u2019t seem like a stretch to assume it would have seized on a favorable ruling to assert more control over the Judicial Conference of the United States and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.<\/p>\n

It was always weird that a FOIA lawsuit was the vehicle for this effort. In that sense, McFadden\u2019s ruling doesn\u2019t tell us much about the larger constitutional interplay between the executive and judicial branches. He simply ruled that Congress had exempted itself and the courts from FOIA. The America First Legal Foundation argued that the Judicial Conference and Administrative Office weren\u2019t part of the courts but part of the executive branch, and therefore not exempt from FOIA. McFadden ultimately ruled:<\/p>\n

\n

Because the Judicial Conference] and the Administrative Office indeed fall outside FOIA\u2019s reach, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the records request. So it will grant the motion to dismiss.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

When the lawsuit was originally filed earlier this year, it came at a time of unprecedented conflict between the Trump administration and the judiciary. For the first time, the White House had tried to communicate with judicial branch employees directly via mass email. The General Services Administration was unilaterally talking about closing federal buildings<\/a> around the country that house federal courts and court services. Federal judges were even expressing concern that their security protection by U.S. marshals \u2014 an executive branch agency \u2014 might be revoked or made contingent.<\/p>\n

For now, an obscure FOIA lawsuit won\u2019t be a backdoor way for the Trump White House to bring some critical elements of the judicial branch under its control. <\/p>\n

Wisconsin Judge Convicted of Interfering With ICE<\/h2>\n

Wisconsin state judge Hannah Dugan was convicted<\/a> on one felony count and acquitted on one misdemeanor account for interfering<\/a> with the ICE arrest<\/a> of an undocumented immigrant in her courthouse. My sense is all three of these things are true:<\/p>\n