A strong majority of Americans believe the Supreme Court is carefully navigating rulings to avoid direct confrontation with President Donald Trump, even as they overwhelmingly support the court's decisions blocking his most aggressive executive actions, according to a new Marquette Law School Poll released this week.
Fifty-seven percent of adults surveyed said the Supreme Court wants to avoid rulings that Trump might refuse to obey, a figure unchanged from January despite the court's February decision striking down most of Trump's tariffs. The polling reveals a public that simultaneously supports judicial checks on executive power while questioning whether those checks can be fully enforced.
Overwhelming Support for Constitutional Limits
Two-thirds of adults surveyed this month said they supported the court's decision that Trump lacked authority to impose sweeping tariffs, affirming broad public backing for constitutional limits on presidential power over economic policy. The support reflects concerns about unchecked executive authority over matters traditionally requiring congressional action.
Nearly seven-in-ten adults surveyed after the April 1 oral arguments said the court should rule that Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship is unconstitutional. Trump's order would end automatic citizenship for babies born in the United States unless at least one parent is a citizen or permanent resident, fundamentally altering a constitutional guarantee that has existed since the Fourteenth Amendment's ratification.
Presidential Pressure on the Court
Trump has been predicting that the court will not let him end automatic citizenship, and in a social media post 2 days ago on April 21, he wrote, "No Country can be successful with such an anchor wrapped firmly around its neck, but based on the questioning by Republican Nominated Justices that I watched firsthand in the Court, we lose." Trump complained that the justices appointed by Republican presidents are letting themselves be pushed around by Democrats.
Trump appointed three of the court's six conservative justices. He attended part of the April 1 oral arguments on birthright citizenship 22 days ago, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to sit in on the court's debate. During the arguments, the justices seemed inclined to find that Trump cannot change the rules for birthright citizenship through an executive order.
Federal Reserve Independence at Stake
The court is also deciding whether the president can remove Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve's board of governors, and two-thirds of adults surveyed want the court to rule against Trump. The case raises fundamental questions about the independence of economic institutions designed to operate free from direct political control.
Decisions are expected by the end of June or early July.
Why This Matters:
These polling results reveal deep public concern about the balance of power between the executive and judicial branches at a moment when fundamental constitutional protections face unprecedented challenges. The overwhelming support for the court's limitations on presidential authority—on tariffs, birthright citizenship, and Federal Reserve independence—demonstrates that Americans across the political spectrum value institutional checks even when they produce outcomes at odds with the sitting president's agenda. The birthright citizenship case directly affects millions of families and future generations, determining whether a constitutional guarantee can be overridden by executive action. The Federal Reserve case threatens the independence of economic policymaking from political interference. Together, these cases will define whether democratic institutions can maintain their constitutional roles or whether executive power can expand without meaningful constraint, with profound implications for rights, economic stability, and the rule of law.