When a president defies a court, the media pulls the fire alarm. Legal experts fill TV panels with words like "unconstitutional" and "authoritarian." The phrase “constitutional crisis” gets tossed around like glitter at a political parade.
But what most people forget is that history doesn’t always side with the judiciary. Some of America’s greatest presidents defied court rulings, and history later confirmed that those examples of defiance were not only justified but necessary. They didn’t do it to seek power. They did it to protect the country when others froze.
That’s not a crisis. That’s leadership.
Now that two federal courts have blocked President Trump’s new economic tariffs, it’s worth revisiting the long American tradition of presidents ignoring the gavel when national security, survival, or sovereignty are on the line. In every example below, the court ruled against the president, but the president was right.
Lincoln and Habeas Corpus: Breaking the Law to Save the Union
In 1861, as the nation buckled under secession, President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus. That gave Union generals the authority to arrest Confederate sympathizers without a judge reviewing the case.
This was no hypothetical fear. Pro-Southern saboteurs in Maryland had torn up railroad tracks and destroyed bridges, threatening troop movements near Washington, D.C.
Chief Justice Roger Taney, still clinging to the robes of his infamous Dred Scott legacy, ruled that Lincoln had no such authority in Ex parte Merryman. Taney claimed only Congress could suspend habeas corpus.
Lincoln ignored him.
He asked the public a simple question: Should all the laws be enforced while the nation falls, or should we preserve the nation first so that the statutes can matter again?
Congress eventually backed Lincoln. And historians, liberal and conservative alike, agree his decision saved the Union. The courts wrung their hands. Lincoln saved the country.
FDR and the Gold Clause Cases: Legal Orthodoxy vs. Economic Recovery
When Franklin D. Roosevelt came into office, the country was sliding off a cliff. Unemployment had reached biblical proportions. Banks were failing. People hoarded gold. Deflation made debt impossible to repay.
FDR made a radical move: he took America off the gold standard. He voided “gold clauses” in contracts, which guaranteed payment in gold instead of paper dollars.
The move enraged investors and Wall Street lawyers, who saw it as a direct violation of property rights.
For Our VIPs: When Did Judges Gain Power to Override Presidents?
In Perry v. United States (1935), the Supreme Court acknowledged that Roosevelt's move was unconstitutional. He had broken binding contracts. However, the Court effectively shrugged and ruled that the plaintiff hadn’t suffered actual damages since he had been repaid the equivalent amount in currency.
Roosevelt stared down the Court and dared them to stop him.
The gamble worked. Inflation began to rise, banks stabilized, and Americans could breathe again. Critics accused him of shredding the Constitution.
But when the dust settled, it turned out Roosevelt saved the system that made the Constitution possible in the first place.
Truman and the Steel Seizure: No Court Can Build a Tank
Fast forward to 1952. The Korean War was raging. The United Steelworkers threatened a nationwide strike. Without steel, the U.S. military couldn't make tanks, artillery, or warships.
President Harry Truman, unwilling to let war production halt, ordered the federal seizure of America’s steel mills.
The case reached the Supreme Court quickly. In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, the Court ruled that Truman had exceeded his constitutional authority. They said Congress had not authorized the seizure, and therefore it was unlawful.
Truman lost. Legally.
But he complied with the ruling and found other ways to keep steel flowing. The military stayed supplied, and the war effort never stalled.
Historians now view Truman’s action as an example of moral courage under pressure, even if the legal footing was shaky. He acted first, hoping the country would catch up.
It did.
Jefferson and the Judiciary: Midnight Appointments and Morning Resolve
When Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801, he faced a judiciary packed with Federalist loyalists thanks to John Adams’ last-minute “Midnight Judges.” Jefferson refused to deliver some of their commissions. One of the snubbed appointees, William Marbury, sued.
That case became Marbury v. Madison.
Chief Justice John Marshall used it to establish judicial review, the principle that courts could declare laws unconstitutional.
But while flexing the Court’s power, Marshall also agreed that Jefferson didn’t have to deliver Marbury’s commission.
Jefferson didn’t gloat. He warned that if courts could rule on everything, they’d become despots in robes.
That wasn’t disrespect to the law. That was a president defending the balance of power between branches. And it set the stage for every future president to challenge judicial overreach when it threatened to override the people’s will.
George Washington and Neutrality: Saving a Nation with Silence
In 1793, France and Britain were at war. Revolutionary France expected the United States to repay its debt with military support. After all, they’d helped us beat the British.
Many in Congress, especially Jeffersonians, wanted to honor that alliance.
President Washington said no.
He issued a Proclamation of Neutrality on his own. Critics howled. They said he didn’t have the authority. Only Congress could steer foreign policy.
But Washington didn’t budge. He knew the new republic couldn’t afford another war. It had no army. No navy. No money.
His decision allowed the U.S. to grow stronger and avoid catastrophe. Although there was no Supreme Court ruling, the legal backlash was fierce.
Still, Washington’s gamble paid off. Today, his neutrality is one of the wisest decisions ever made by an American president.
A Real Constitutional Crisis? Look at the Courts
And now, President Trump proposes sweeping tariffs to protect American industries and economic sovereignty.
Two courts block it. They don’t dispute the wisdom of the policy. They don’t argue it’s bad for the country. They just say he used the wrong procedural hook.
Suddenly, the media cries constitutional crisis!
But we’ve been here before. A true constitutional crisis doesn’t come from bold executive action. It comes when no branch has the will to act. Or when judges try to micromanage national survival from the comfort of a bench.
Presidents are elected to lead, not to wait for permission slips.
Lincoln didn’t wait. Roosevelt didn’t wait. Washington didn’t ask Congress to run foreign policy. Jefferson stood against an arrogant court. Truman gambled to keep war machines moving.
History didn’t punish them. It honored them.
Let the Courts Write Opinions; Let Presidents Make History
The Constitution was not written to be a suicide pact. It was forged in revolution, amid fire and doubt, to build a framework resilient enough to endure war, chaos, and political storms.
But it was never intended to be interpreted so rigidly that the very republic it created could be endangered by indecision.
Presidents are not emperors, but neither are they errand boys for the judiciary.
Trump, like Lincoln, like Roosevelt, like Washington, is asserting the ancient right of the executive to lead when conditions demand it. He sees a threat to American prosperity and security. He is acting decisively, within the scope of his constitutional authority, to blunt that threat.
And just like clockwork, here come the professional alarmists clutching their pearls. The courts, slow and insulated, bristle at his urgency. The pundits shout “authoritarian” as if they’ve forgotten every lesson from the last 250 years.
The same people who cheer when a president rewrites immigration law by executive order now meltdown when another president tries to safeguard economic sovereignty by using laws already on the books.
This isn’t a constitutional crisis. This is a constitutional correction. It’s a reminder that leadership requires courage, not consensus. And that sometimes, the legal map isn’t drawn quickly enough to guide a country through a sudden storm.
History's Place
History doesn’t remember every court ruling. It remembers who stood up when it counted.
Lincoln didn’t wait for Taney’s permission to save the Union. Roosevelt didn’t beg Wall Street’s blessing to save the economy. Truman didn’t ask Congress how to keep tanks rolling. Washington didn’t consult with factions before declaring neutrality. Jefferson didn’t let the judiciary solidify a political class.
And suppose Donald Trump’s tariffs strengthen America’s economy, restore industrial self-reliance, and checkmate the influence of adversaries like China. In that case, the same historians who scowl today will write differently tomorrow.
Because when presidents act boldly and get it right, the courts eventually catch up or get left behind.
In the American experiment, the court can rule. But the president must lead.
And thank God, sometimes he does.
The left will always find new ways to hide failure behind slogans. We prefer facts.
Stand with PJ Media. Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT for 60% off.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member