It boils down to Donald Trump and John Roberts once more.

Naturally, Chief Justice Roberts authored the Supreme Court ruling that granted then-candidate Trump significant immunity from criminal prosecution last year. However, Roberts was also the one who guided the court in its measured approach to cases resulting from President Trump's government-restructuring orders in recent weeks, declining to grant administration attorneys the expeditious approval they requested.

Roberts has been both a facilitator and a check on Trump's agenda since the start of his first term as president in 2017.

Roberts was probably incited on Tuesday by a furious post calling a federal judge presently presiding over a migrant deportation case "crooked," following weeks of silence in response to Trump's tirades on the judiciary. According to Trump, the judge "should be IMPEACHED!!!"

"It has been established for more than two centuries that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision," Roberts said shortly after the event. For that reason, the standard appellate review procedure is in place.

Roberts' response was encouraging, if long overdue, for US district court judges who are currently in the forefront of the Trump case.

The statement was just what retired Justice Stephen Breyer needed.

It's educational. It's brief. It doesn't provide credit or blame to anyone. "It says to appeal if you don't like what the judge holds," Breyer reiterated to CNN.

Roberts and Trump, the chief heads of the executive and judicial branches, have now clashed twice in dramatic ways. Roberts recalled a similar censure of Trump in 2018 in his statement on Tuesday.

More generally, the encounter served as a reminder of the roles that both leaders—Trump, who is 78 years old and starting a second term, and Roberts, who is 70 years old and appointed for life—continue to play in each other's lives and in the public consciousness.

The Supreme Court ultimately brings everything to a close.
Trump has issued numerous executive orders since taking office on January 20 in an effort to tighten immigration laws, reduce the size of the federal workforce, and freeze money that Congress has already approved.

Lawsuits have been filed by federal employees, civil rights and immigration advocates, states, and government-funded organizations. The majority of cases are still being heard by US district court judges, who are the first of three levels of the federal judiciary.

The justices have slowed down action deadlines and rejected Trump's pleas for urgency in the few cases that have made it to the Supreme Court on a preliminary basis.

Roberts and a cross-ideological majority have so far indicated a certain amount of compromise and moderation. Along bitter ideological lines, that was the exact opposite message conveyed by the 6-3 immunity ruling in July of last year, which permitted Trump to avoid accusations of election subversion related to the 2020 race.

Judges from lower courts are currently primarily involved in challenges to Trump's government reform and his pressure on constitutional limits. Judges have been conflicted about how strongly to criticize the administration's bolder efforts.

Trump's anger was stoked by a case that is presently before US District Court Judge James Boasberg. Based in Washington, DC, Boasberg has been looking for details regarding the deportations the administration carried out on a few migrants who were supposedly connected to a gang in Venezuela last weekend. Boasberg wants to know if the government disregarded a previous directive he issued to halt deportations in accordance with the 1798 Alien Enemies Act.

Trump called Boasberg a “Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama” in his Truth Social post before absurdly calling for the judge to be removed from office.

All federal judges are appointed for life, and the only way to remove them is by Senate conviction and House impeachment; this infrequent procedure has effectively been saved for judges who have committed crimes.

Any litigant who loses a case must appeal, first to a US appellate court and then to the nine-member US Supreme Court, as Roberts and Breyer plainly noted. (The decision of Boasberg has already been appealed by the Justice Department.)

"He didn't mention my name," Trump remarked after acknowledging Roberts' statement later on Tuesday. During his interview with Laura Ingraham of Fox News, Trump refrained from expressing any hostility toward Roberts. Rather, he mocked lower court justices once more.

Trump stated, "We have bad judges," and at some point, he added, "I think you have to start looking at what you do when you have a rogue judge."

Roberts publicly addressed Trump’s criticism of judges only once during the president’s first term. Trump had also used Obama's name in the previous incident.

The president called the US district court judge in San Francisco who rendered a preliminary ruling against Trump's first-term asylum policy a "Obama judge" and told reporters, "I'll tell you what, it's not going to happen like this anymore."

"We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges," Roberts said in response. According to him, every judge was "trying their hardest to give everyone who appeared before them equal rights."

Roberts frequently supported the Trump agenda in rulings on the merits of administration policy; in 2018, for instance, he wrote a decision upholding a travel restriction that applied to nations having a majority of Muslims. But there were some outliers. As seen by his significant last-minute vote in 2019 against Trump lawyers' claimed justification for include a citizenship question in the 2020 census questionnaire, Roberts seemed to add greater skepticism to the administration's actions.

This second chapter of Trump will put Roberts and his colleagues to the ultimate test. Additionally, Roberts' relationship with Trump is probably going to come under even more public scrutiny.

Trump clasped hands with the justices as he exited the chamber earlier this month following his address to a joint session of Congress.

"Thank you again," Trump said, patting Roberts' arm as he arrived. Won’t forget it.”

Trump himself said on social media after the discussion, "I thanked him for SWEARING ME IN ON INAUGURATION DAY, AND DOING A REALLY GOOD JOB IN SO DOING!" Many observers thought Trump was thanking him for the immunity ruling.

Regardless of Roberts's thoughts, he pivoted and exited the room.