‘Judicial coup must end’ Miller calls on Supreme Court to curb judge blocking Trump policies

WASHINGTON, DC: White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller launched a blistering attack on the federal judiciary Saturday, June 6, after a judge blocked key Trump administration immigration policies, warning that public confidence in the courts could collapse if the Supreme Court fails to intervene.

Miller’s remarks mark the latest escalation in the administration’s growing battle with federal judges as multiple Trump initiatives continue to face legal roadblocks across the country.

Miller blasts 'judicial coup'

Miller reacted furiously after a federal court ruling halted several administration measures that restricted immigration benefits for applicants from dozens of countries.

Taking to social media, Miller accused lower-court judges of overriding the will of voters and preventing elected officials from carrying out immigration policy.

“Local judge says it’s illegal to restrict migration and that America actually belongs to 8 billion foreigners, not you or your family,” Miller wrote.

He argued that judges were increasingly inserting themselves into political decisions and warned that continued intervention by lower courts could have serious consequences for public trust in the judicial system.

“If SCOTUS doesn’t restrain these judges, the people will lose all faith in the courts,” he added.

The comments reflect growing frustration inside Trump’s orbit as administration policies on immigration, border security and deportation continue to encounter courtroom challenges.

Trump allies have increasingly described these rulings as examples of unelected judges obstructing policies supported by voters, while critics argue the courts are simply enforcing federal law and constitutional limits.

Judge blocks immigration restrictions

Miller’s criticism followed a major ruling from Chief Judge John McConnell of the US District Court in Rhode Island, who blocked a series of immigration-related restrictions implemented by the administration.

The policies had limited access to asylum, green cards, work permits, citizenship applications and other immigration benefits for applicants from 39 countries included on the administration’s travel-restriction list.

The measures were introduced on national security grounds after administration officials argued that enhanced screening procedures were necessary following a high-profile criminal case involving an asylum recipient.

In his decision, McConnell concluded that the government lacked sufficient legal authority for several of the restrictions and said the administration failed to adequately justify its actions.

The judge also argued that applicants affected by the policies had already complied with legal requirements, including filing applications, paying fees and attending interviews.

The ruling temporarily restores access to immigration processing for many affected applicants and represents another significant legal setback for the administration’s immigration agenda.