WASHINGTON – What a difference a year can make.When PresidentDonald TrumpgreetedSupreme Court Justice John Robertslast year at his first joint session of Congress, it was all warmth and good vibes. "Thank you. Thank you again. Won't forget it," Trumptold Robertsafter the speech – causing much speculation about what, exactly, he wouldn't forget. Was he thanking him for the historic2024 rulingthat handed Trump significant immunity for some potentially criminal acts?
Trump later said he was merely thanking Roberts for having done such a great job administering the oath of office on Inauguration Day.
A year later, the president probably won't be thanking Roberts at Tuesday'sState of the Union address.
After six of the justices – including Roberts and two justices that Trump himself installed on the bench –struck downhis sweeping tariffs last week which were the linchpin of his economic agenda , Trump attacked.Aggressively.
More:Trump threatens 'obnoxious' new tariffs after Supreme Court setback
"I'm ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what's right for our country," Trump said hours after they struck down his tariffs. "They're just being fools and lapdogs.''
More:Trump v. Trump. Which president shows up at the State of the Union?
More:How the Supreme Court's tariff ruling split the conservative justices
Must See TV?
The president's outburst raised the question of what he might say during the State of the Union address, which at least some of the justices are expected to attend.
"Curious if Trump gives John Roberts a different kind of, `Won't forget it,' than he gave him at least year's State of the Union," Kate Shaw, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, said on thepodcast Strict Scrutinythat she co-hosts.
Washington consultant Bruce Mehlman said the court's tariffs ruling turned Trump's speech into "Must See TV."
"He may continue such broadsides in person," Mehlmanwrote on Substack, noting that previous presidents have excoriated court decisions with which they disagreed, "whether to score political points with their base or `work the refs' for future rulings."
`Very awkward situation'
Trumpbrought up one of the future rulingsin a social media post on Monday.
After again criticizing the "incompetent"Supreme Courtfor the tariffs decision, Trumpsaidthe justices "will find a way to come to the wrong conclusion" on his executive order endingbirthright citizenshipfor some children born in the United States. (That case is being argued in April. And the justices could decide as soon as next week whether they will review the 2023 jury verdict against Trump in one of the two civil casesbrought by writer E. Jean Carroll.)
More:Trump ramps up attack on birthright citizenship case in Supreme Court
Jeremy Dalrymple, an associate director of the center-right R Street Institute, said this kind of tension between a president and the court isn't abnormal.
Advertisement
"It's inherent to the system that we have. This is why we have the separation of powers," Dalrymple said. "He's free to make the comments that he wants about it. Whether the justices take that into account, I don't think they should. They need to a de novo review of whatever cases come before them."
But Keith Whittington, a professor at Yale Law School who haswritten about justices attending the State of the Union address, said it would be better if they stayed home.
"And I think it would be particularly wise for them to skip this one given the risk of how the president might use the platform to respond to the tariffs case," he said. "It will put the justices in a very awkward situation to have to sit in the chamber as members of Congress cheered as the president attacked them in particularly strong and personal terms."
`They can take it'
Gabe Roth, executive director of the court transparency group Fix the Court, disagreed.
"The justices are tough, and they can take it," Roth said.
Having them there, he continued, reminds America that there are three branches of government and each has a role to play.
And because there are no cameras in the courtroom, the State of the Union address is a rare opportunity for Americans to see the justices with their own eyes – which is important for building trust in the institution, Roth said.
More:F-bombs, profanity and politics: a story not fit for this family newspaper
Justices decide for themselves whether to attend
Attending is a personal decision.
Justice Samuel Alitostopped going after President Barack Obama, in 2010, sharply criticized the court's ruling on a campaign finance case. Television cameras captured Alito shaking his head andappearing to mouth "not true"in response to Obama's description of the ruling.
More:Will Trump get a fourth Supreme Court justice? Speculation swirls around Alito
Roberts typically attends but said in 2010: "I'm not sure why we're there."
"The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court, according to the requirements of protocol, has to sit there expressionless, I think, is very troubling," Robertstold law studentsat the University of Alabama.
At a different law school event the previous year, Robertsrevealeda more down-to-earth reason why his predecessor – Chief Justice William Rehnquist − skipped one of President Ronald Reagan's addresses.
The speech conflicted with a watercolor class at the local YMCA for which Rehnquist had paid $25, Roberts recounted, "and he wasn't going to miss one of the sessions."
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:State of the Union watch: What to expect for Supreme Court justices
