White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt Accuses the Left of ‘Judge Shopping’ to Undermine the Administration

In a bold statement during a White House press briefing on March 19, 2025, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt criticized what she described as a coordinated effort by the far left to manipulate the judicial system. According to Leavitt, political opponents of the administration have been engaging in “judge shopping”—a strategy where plaintiffs strategically file lawsuits before judges they believe will be sympathetic to their cause.

Judicial Activism or Fair Process?

Leavitt accused certain judges of acting as “partisan activists from the bench” in a deliberate attempt to block and derail President Trump’s agenda. She emphasized that this practice is not about upholding the law but rather about using the courts as a political weapon to obstruct policies that were democratically mandated by the American people.

“It has become increasingly evident that there is a deliberate and coordinated effort by the far left to engage in judge shopping—strategically selecting judges who have demonstrated a clear partisan bias and activist tendencies from the bench. This tactic is being deployed in an attempt to obstruct and undermine this administration’s policy agenda at every turn.”

She further warned that the abuse of judicial authority to block executive decisions represents a threat to the constitutional balance of power. In particular, she cited cases where federal judges have issued nationwide injunctions against policies related to immigration enforcement, economic reforms, and executive orders aimed at national security.

1000% https://t.co/AAENlVVaja

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 19, 2025

The Battle Between the Executive and the Judiciary

This is not the first time a U.S. administration has accused the judiciary of overstepping its role. Over the years, both Republican and Democratic presidents have clashed with courts that issued injunctions against executive actions. However, the frequency of such rulings against the Trump administration has led White House officials to believe that they are facing an unprecedented level of judicial resistance.

Critics of the administration, on the other hand, argue that these legal challenges are necessary to prevent overreach and protect civil liberties. They claim that courts serve as a necessary check on executive power, ensuring that presidential policies comply with constitutional principles.

Yet, for Leavitt and many others in the White House, the trend of politically motivated lawsuits is not about checks and balances, but rather about partisan interference. The administration has vowed to fight back against judicial obstruction and push forward with its agenda despite these legal challenges.

A Struggle Seen Beyond the U.S.: The Case of Greece

The issue of judicial manipulation is not unique to the United States. Greece is facing a strikingly similar situation, where courts are increasingly being used as political tools to influence government policy. Judicial delays, selective rulings, and politically motivated legal cases have all played a role in shaping key national issues.

In recent years, Greece has witnessed legal battles over corruption investigations, economic reforms, and controversial government policies. Critics argue that the judiciary, instead of serving as an independent body, is being influenced by political interests, corporate lobbies, and media pressure. Much like in the U.S., these judicial actions have delayed or derailed government initiatives, raising concerns about the fairness and integrity of the legal system.

A notable example is the Tempi train crash investigation. The tragic accident, which occurred on February 28, 2023, resulted in the deaths of 57 people, mostly young students. Public outrage over the handling of the investigation has been significant, with allegations of a cover-up and demands for accountability. Protests have erupted across the country, with citizens accusing the government of hiding significant evidence and running an opaque investigation. Read more on AP News

The situation escalated when Deputy Minister Christos Triantopoulos resigned amid accusations of involvement in a cover-up related to the Tempi investigation. Triantopoulos denied any wrongdoing but stepped down to support the inquiry by the parliament. Read more on Ekathimerini

Furthermore, the appointment process of Greece’s judiciary has been a point of contention. Unlike some countries where judges are elected, in Greece, judges are appointed by the President on the advice of the Supreme Judicial Council, which is mostly composed of other judges. While this system aims to maintain judicial independence, critics argue that it allows political interference, especially when the ruling party controls the appointments.

These events have led to a decline in public trust in the judicial system. A recent poll indicated that 80% of Greeks do not trust the justice system, citing issues such as its slow pace and political interference. Read more on To Vima

While every democracy relies on independent courts to uphold the law, the growing perception that certain judges are politically motivated is fueling distrust in judicial institutions. Whether in the United States or Greece, the debate over the true role of the judiciary—whether as an impartial arbiter or a political tool—remains a crucial issue that will shape governance in the years to come.