World

‘This Is Worse’: Trump’s Judicial Defiance Veers Beyond the Autocrat Playbook

Published

9 months ago

March 20, 2025

‘This Is Worse’: Trump’s Judicial Defiance Veers Beyond the Autocrat Playbook

President Trump’s intensifying conflict with the federal courts is unusually aggressive compared with similar disputes in other countries, according to scholars. Unlike leaders who subverted or restructured the courts, Mr. Trump is acting as if judges were already too weak to constrain his power.

“Honest to god, I’ve never seen anything like it,” said Steven Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and coauthor of “How Democracies Die” and “Competitive Authoritarianism.”

“We look at these comparative cases in the 21st century, like Hungary and Poland and Turkey. And in a lot of respects, this is worse,” he said. “These first two months have been much more aggressively authoritarian than almost any other comparable case I know of democratic backsliding.”

There are many examples of autocratic leaders constraining the power of the judiciary by packing courts with compliant judges, or by changing the laws that give them authority, he said. But it is extremely rare for leaders to simply claim the power to disregard or override court orders directly, especially so immediately after taking office.

In Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has purged thousands of judges from the judiciary as part of a broader effort to consolidate power in his own hands. But that required decades of effort and multiple constitutional changes, Mr. Levitsky said. It only became fully successful after a failed 2016 coup provided a political justification for the purge.

In Hungary, Prime Minister Victor Orban packed the constitutional courts with friendly judges and forced hundreds of others into retirement, but did so over a period of years, using constitutional amendments and administrative changes.

Over the weekend, the Trump administration ignored a federal judge’s order not to deport a group of Venezuelan men, then later tried to retroactively justify its actions with arguments so distant from settled law and ordinary practice that legal experts have said they border on frivolous.

Defenders of the Trump administration’s policies have claimed that judges have too much power over the executive branch.

On Tuesday, Mr. Trump further raised the stakes by publicly calling for the impeachment of the judge who had issued the order, prompting a rare rebuke from Chief Justice John G. Roberts.

“For more than two centuries,” the chief justice said, “it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

Mr. Levitsky said he was struggling to find a precedent for what the Trump administration is doing.

“The zeal with which these guys are engaging in increasingly open, authoritarian behavior is unlike almost anything I’ve seen. Erdogan, Chavez, Orban — they hid it,” Mr. Levitsky said.

Questioning authority

The conflict between the Trump administration and Judge James E. Boasberg of the Federal District Court in Washington is nominally about deportation. But legal experts say it has become a showdown over whether judges should be able to constrain the executive branch at all.

“Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power,” Vice President JD Vance declared last month. “I don’t care what the judges think — I don’t care what the left thinks,” Mr. Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, said this week during an appearance on “Fox & Friends.”

On Tuesday, Mr. Trump wrote on social media that Judge Boasberg was a “Radical Lunatic” and should be “IMPEACHED,” because the judge “was not elected President — He didn’t WIN the popular VOTE (by a lot!), he didn’t WIN ALL SEVEN SWING STATES, he didn’t WIN 2,750 to 525 Counties, HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING!”

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said on social media that “A single judge” cannot mandate the movements of a planeload of people “who were physically expelled from U.S. soil.”

(In fact, U.S. courts can and do order the return of aliens who have been wrongfully deported.)

The Trump administration’s tactics are highly unusual, said Andrew O’Donohue, a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who studies clashes between courts and elected leaders around the world. Typically, battles over court power have tended to be extensions of political divisions.

In Israel, for example, the right-wing government led by Benjamin Netanyahu has sought to curb the power of the courts, which were historically associated with the country’s left wing. In Turkey, the courts were associated with the secular state, and clashed with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s religious, populist agenda.

But Mr. Trump and the federal courts are not ideological foes in the same way. Federal judges hold a range of views, but the judiciary has grown more conservative in recent decades. And the Supreme Court, which has a conservative majority, has delivered the political right a number of significant legal victories in recent years, including granting presidents sweeping immunity from criminal prosecution.

Norms of restraint, flipped on their head

Courts do not have their own armies or significant police forces. Yet leaders typically obey judges’ orders, because of the political costs of flouting them.

Usually, voters won’t reward their elected leaders for violating norms, disrupting a stable constitutional order, or taking actions that are intrinsically unlawful, said Aziz Huq, a law professor at the University of Chicago and co-author of the book “How to Save a Constitutional Democracy.”

But that calculus may not apply to Mr. Trump, who has based his political appeal on gleefully flouting sacrosanct norms. Refusing to accept courts’ authority may actually appeal to the president’s base, Huq said, if they take it as evidence of strength rather than lawlessness.

Past presidents have also been more constrained by elites within the political establishment.

“Richard Nixon had to care not just about public opinion, but Walter Cronkite, and Republican and Democratic Party leaders,” Mr. Levitsky said. “That constraint, which was difficult to measure, but I think very real in the 20th century, has lifted.”

Today, traditional gatekeepers are much weaker — particularly when leaders like Mr. Trump profit politically by picking fights with the establishment.

Protecting courts against hostile leaders

There are proven ways that courts can successfully defend their authority against leaders’ noncompliance or attacks. The most effective source of protection is when the courts can draw on support from other government officials outside the judiciary, “who can put muscle behind a court decision,” said Mr. O’Donohue.

When President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil tried to defy court decisions over lockdowns and public health measures during the pandemic, local mayors and governors followed the court rulings anyway.

But that tactic may be more difficult to use when the order concerns a federal agency directly. Local leaders cannot force the Department of Homeland Security to comply with a court order to halt a deportation flight, or restore USAID’s funding.

Political pressure to protect courts’ power can also be effective, even in cases where a leader’s own constituents are pushing in the opposite direction.

In Israel, for example, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s own supporters were strongly in favor of proposed laws that would have sharply limited the courts’ power to constrain political leaders. But the broader public mobilized fierce opposition to the reforms.

In 2023, thousands of Israelis took to the streets almost every Saturday in mass protests against the judicial overhaul. Influential sectors of society, including military reservists, business leaders, trade unionists and senior politicians also publicly opposed the law. Their actions shut down businesses, traffic and even Ben-Gurion International Airport. Eventually, Netanyahu was forced to suspend most of the planned changes.

Mass protest movements are difficult to form and sustain, however. Thus far there is little sign that a similar movement is forming in the United States.

Political pressure could also come from within Trump’s political coalition.

“If even a dozen Republicans in Congress had the capacity to stand up to Trump, this would be a very different ballgame,” Mr. Levitsky said. “Trump and Musk and Stephen Miller could not do this alone. They’re doing it with the full cooperation of the majority party in Congress.”

“We’re in a bad place,” he said.

Click to comment

World

To Give FIFA’s Roblox Deal Context, Look at YouTube

Published

3 hours ago

December 22, 2025

Press Room

To Give FIFA’s Roblox Deal Context, Look at YouTube

Corporate boardrooms are trying to wrap their heads around how to leverage mobile-focused video game behemoth Roblox for their own gain, similar to how they were once forced to adapt to the rise of YouTube.

Like YouTube, Roblox diverges from the entertainment status quo. Both are driven by a sprawling network of content creators, many of whom begin as independent developers with little technical knowledge, and their audiences skew young. YouTube gives people tools to publish videos and an app in which users can watch them; Roblox gives people tools to build video games and an app in which users can play them.

Because of how Roblox games originate, they do not look as polished as those from big-budget studios on Xbox or PlayStation consoles. The graphics are rudimentary, and the games are most often played via mobile devices. Yet Roblox’s offerings, which are mostly free to play but often sell in-game cosmetic items and power-ups, can still be wildly popular, amassing more than 100 million daily active players. As Sportico has reported, mobile gaming is significantly larger than console usage globally.

Roblox’s grittier feel—akin to the appeal of an at-home YouTube vlog—is an asset. That said, it’s a trait that poses a challenge for brands, which feel a need to get involved but must do so in a way that comes off as organic within the raw aesthetics of the platform.

Enter the middlemen. Companies such as Gamefam connect native Roblox games and their creators with brands, reminiscent of the multi-channel networks (MCNs) that proliferated YouTube in the early 2010s and signed video makers to content partnerships.

The middlemen assume development and commercial responsibilities upon gaining a game’s rights. They implement corporate markings while ensuring a title still resonates with users.

On Friday, Gamefam announced the release of FIFA Super Soccer—a rebrand of a popular game it already owned, Super League Soccer. FIFA Super Soccer is one of many Roblox titles Gamefam has acquired from independent creators. As part of its adaptation, it added licensed properties related to FIFA, teams and some of FIFA’s brand partners, such as Adidas.

Screenshot of “FIFA Super Soccer” on Roblox

In this case, Gamefam has maintained a working relationship with the game maker, Mats Watte, whose original creation did not feature any intellectual property from soccer organizations. Gamefam did not disclose the financial terms of its licensing pact with FIFA that led to the rebranding.

“I was just in a meeting earlier today, and we were talking about, well, this is kind of like a [multi-channel network],” Ricardo Briceno, chief business officer of Gamefam, told Sportico in a video interview ahead of the FIFA Super Soccer announcement. “But it’s also a dirty word these days. So we’re not quite an MCN because it’s not just aggregating, because we also are operating and, like developing and doing things. But I don’t think it’s a bad example. It’s a good connection there.”

Many of YouTube’s multi-channel networks, perhaps most infamously Machinima, ultimately developed negative reputations. Independent creators came to resent the deals they signed, which they considered predatory because of lopsided revenue-sharing terms and long-term restrictions that barred them from working elsewhere.

There are some differences between MCNs and third-party Roblox development companies. For starters, the game, not the creator, is the main product on Roblox. Rather than set a perpetual quota for influencer content production, as was often the case with YouTube MCNs that would burn out video makers, Roblox’s middlemen generally obtain a game that already exists and then handle further development themselves.

Watte, the person who created the game that has morphed into FIFA Super Soccer, is a college student at King’s College London, according to his LinkedIn profile. He has developed games since he was a kid. Watte has spoken positively in public posts about his experiences with Gamefam. When Gamefam helped FIFA integrate Club World Cup branding into what was then called Super League Soccer for a prior agreement, Watte wrote, “Thank you to Gamefam and FIFA for trusting us with this opportunity, and to everyone on my team for making this happen in such a short span of time.”

A spokesperson representing Gamefam declined to specify whether Watte received an upfront payment for FIFA Super Soccer, whether he gets a cut of future revenue related to the title, or whether his role as “Creative Director for FIFA Super Soccer” means he is a full-time, salaried employee.

“We partnered with the game creator to put the backing of a professional studio behind Super League Soccer,” the spokesperson wrote. “In partnership with the original game creator, Gamefam now runs the game in full and provides our live operations capabilities and brand activation expertise. The numbers continue to get better and better as we work together.”

FIFA has a rich history in video games for consoles made by major studios, and until 2022, it maintained a long-term partnership with Electronic Arts. Its breakup with EA removed FIFA from the title of EA’s hit soccer video game franchise. Afterward, FIFA president Gianni Infantino declared that “when [children play] a football simulation game, they play FIFA, it cannot be named something else.” Ahead of the men’s FIFA World Cup next summer, Infantino has been hellbent on besting EA.

FIFA worked with the studio Mythical Games on a separate, non-Roblox project that led to the release of FIFA Rivals in the Apple and Android app stores. It also has a licensing and esports deal with Konami’s eFootball, which is playable on mobile and console.

None of those endeavors, or the new FIFA Super Soccer title sponsorship, carry the same reach of EA Sports’ renamed soccer franchise EA Sports FC. Still, when taken together, they are formidable.

Overall, Roblox has a $60 billion market cap and 111.8 million average daily active users, according to a Sept. 4 financial report. Before it rebranded from Super League Soccer last week, FIFA Super Soccer averaged 1.5 million daily gameplay sessions with a duration of 11 minutes, per Gamefam, though this metric included when the same people opened the game more than once in a 24-hour period.

In the immediate wake of Friday’s name change, FIFA Super Soccer rose into the top 70 for concurrent Roblox users at 21,000, according to a spokesperson. Gamefam works with other sports organizations, including the NFL, on titles that have also made this leaderboard.

As Briceno discusses Roblox integrations with clients who ask how Gamefam’s services can lead to real-world revenue returns, he’s reminded of his own marketing work at previous career stops.

Early in a 12-year tenure at Mattel Inc., Briceno was on the other side, only YouTube was the multimedia puzzle his company was trying to solve.

“We were thinking, we’ve got to get hot,” Briceno said. “Does it drive sales? We know that TV commercials drive sales, but what are we going to do with YouTube, I don’t know if we can measure and blah, blah, blah, and all these things were happening. We said we got to invest in this, this is where the kids are. It just makes logical sense.

“It takes a while until you’re able to generate the data points and the proof points and figure out how to do it in the right way that actually drives scale or sales. … Now we are going through that process on Roblox, and we’ve seen a lot of those early data points, so it just validates what you would think is common sense.”

World

Russian general killed by car bomb, third senior military leader killed this year

Published

4 hours ago

December 22, 2025

Press Room

Russian general killed by car bomb, third senior military leader killed this year

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A Russian general was killed in a car bombing in Moscow on Monday, with investigators saying they suspect Ukrainian intelligence may have been behind the attack.

The bombing targeted Lt. Gen. Fanil Sarvarov, head of the Operational Training Directorate of the Russian Armed Forces’ General Staff, and he died from his injuries. He was the third senior Russian military officer to be killed in a bombing this year.

“Investigators are pursuing numerous lines of inquiry regarding the murder. One of these is that the crime was orchestrated by Ukrainian intelligence services,” said Svetlana Petrenko, the spokesperson for Russia’s Investigative Committee.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that President Vladimir Putin had been immediately informed about Sarvarov’s killing.

PUTIN REJECTS KEY PARTS OF US PEACE PLAN AS KREMLIN OFFICIAL WARNS EUROPE FACES NEW WAR RISK: REPORT

This undated image provided by the Russian Defense Ministry Press Service on Monday, Dec. 22, 2025, shows Lt. Gen. Fanil Sarvarov, head of the Operational Training Directorate of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff, who was killed Monday morning after an explosive device detonated under his car in southern Moscow. (Russian Defense Ministry Press Service via AP)

Sarvarov had previously fought in Chechnya and taken part in Moscow’s military campaign in Syria, according to Russia’s defense ministry.

Ukrainian forces have yet to take responsibility for the attack.

Prior to Sarvarov, Russia lost the head of its nuclear, biological and chemical protection force, Lt. Gen. Igor Kirillov, in a similar bombing earlier this year. Ukrainian forces took responsibility for that attack.

PUTIN DERIDES EUROPEAN LEADERS AS HE INSISTS RUSSIA’S WAR GOALS IN UKRAINE WILL BE MET BY FORCE OR DIPLOMACY

Policemen secure the area near the scene where Lt. Gen. Fanil Sarvarov, head of the Operational Training Directorate of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff, was killed by an explosive device placed under his car in Moscow, Monday, Dec. 22, 2025. (AP Photo)

Russian military officer Lt. Gen. Yaroslav Moskalik was also killed by a car bombing in Moscow in April.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in the aftermath of that attack that he had received reports about the successful “liquidation” of Russian military leaders, though he did not mention Moskalik directly.

The Monday bombing comes as Ukraine, Russia and the U.S. remain in peace talks. Russian officials said they were proceeding “constructively” on Sunday, even as missiles rained down on Ukraine’s port city of Odesa.

Russian President Vladimir Putin listens to a journalist’s question during his annual news conference and call-in show at Gostinny Dvor, in Moscow, on Friday, Dec. 19, 2025. (Alexander Kazakov, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)

Putin also noted on Friday that the nation’s “troops are advancing,” and expressed confidence that Russia would achieve its goals by military force if Ukraine does not accept its peace terms.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“The goals of the special military operation will undoubtedly be achieved. We would prefer to accomplish this and address the root causes of the conflict through diplomatic means,” he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Anders Hagstrom is a reporter with Fox News Digital covering national politics and major breaking news events. Send tips to Anders.Hagstrom@Fox.com, or on X: @Hagstrom_Anders.

World

Germany charges ex-Syrian prison guard over Assad-era abuses

Published

6 hours ago

December 22, 2025

Press Room

Germany charges ex-Syrian prison guard over Assad-era abuses

Prosecutors accuse the official, named as Fahad A, of torturing dozens of prisoners in jail run by Syrian intelligence.

Published On 22 Dec 2025

German prosecutors have charged a former Syrian security official with crimes against humanity, accusing him of torturing dozens of prisoners at a Damascus jail while ex-President Bashar al-Assad was in power.

Germany’s Federal Public Prosecutor General’s office announced the indictment on Monday, alleging the ex-prison guard, named only as Fahad A, took part in more than 100 interrogations between 2011 and 2012 in which prisoners were “subjected to severe physical abuse”.

Universal jurisdiction

In Germany, prosecutors have ⁠used universal jurisdiction laws to seek trials for suspects in crimes against humanity committed anywhere in the world.

Based on ‌these laws, several people suspected of war crimes during the Syrian conflict have been arrested in the last ‍few years in Germany, which is home to about one million Syrians.

In June, a court in Frankfurt handed a life sentence to a Syrian doctor convicted of carrying out acts of torture as part of al-Assad’s crackdown on dissent.

The doctor, Alaa Mousa, was accused of torturing patients at military hospitals in Damascus and Homs, where political prisoners were regularly brought for supposed treatment.

Witnesses described Mousa pouring flammable liquid on a prisoner’s wounds before setting them alight and kicking the man in the face, shattering his teeth. In another incident, the doctor was accused of injecting a detainee with a fatal substance for refusing to be beaten.

One former prisoner described the Damascus hospital where he was held as a “slaughterhouse”.

Presiding judge, Christoph Koller, said the verdict underscored the “brutality of Assad’s dictatorial, unjust regime”.