Hey, NYT, I'm Pretty Sure This Wasn't the Point You Wanted to Make on Judges, But Thanks Anyway

Matt Vespa | January 14, 2026 6:30 AM

These are the best liberal media stories. The ones where the publication unintentionally exposes the opposite of what they’re trying to argue. Of course, The New York Times wanted to drum up some narrative about the Trump administration’s struggles with the courts. The funny part is a) Trump knew this beforehand, which is why his legal team is prepared to appeal all the things, and b) it showed that the lower courts are stacked with illiberal radicals, some of whom think they are the executive.

Twitchy had it first yesterday, and, well, have a laugh:

The higher the court, the likelier Trump was to win rulings in 2025:

District courts: 25%
Appeals courts: 51%
Supreme Court: 88% pic.twitter.com/y71IMxXxl1
— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) January 11, 2026

LOL. I don't think he understands the point he is making here. https://t.co/TftJzyMbo0
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) January 11, 2026

Thanks for pointing out (I’m sure it wasn’t your intent) that the lower courts are packed with leftist ideologues.
— Buzz Patterson (@BuzzPatterson) January 12, 2026

Great (unintentional, I’m sure) job by the NYT to expose the politicization of “resistance” district court judges! https://t.co/kuVkrm8swS
— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) January 12, 2026

But, in all seriousness, one action item, and I know we have a lot on the agenda, is to smash these lower courts. It’s not a legal disagreement; it’s a judicial coup and must be treated accordingly. A district judge does not dictate immigration policy, determine where funds can be spent, or order a deportation flight back. It's comical. And when people with no law degrees can sniff out the BS, you know it's a special kind of left-wing trash.