Reagan-Appointed Judge Resigns So He Can Attack Trump
A Reagan-appointed federal judge has given up his lifetime appointment so he can launch political attacks on President Donald J. Trump — a move conservatives say lays bare the partisan activism long festering inside parts of the federal judiciary.
Judge Mark Wolf, appointed in 1985, announced in a Sunday op-ed for The Atlantic that he is resigning from the bench specifically so he can criticize the president without the constraints of judicial ethics rules. Wolf claimed President Trump is “using the law for partisan purposes,” accusing the administration of pursuing political adversaries while sparing allies — a talking point echoed frequently by left-wing activists.
“My reason is simple: I no longer can bear to be restrained by what judges can say publicly or do outside the courtroom,” Wolf wrote.
“President Donald Trump is using the law for partisan purposes, targeting his adversaries while sparing his friends and donors… This is contrary to everything that I have stood for…”
The former Massachusetts federal judge said the Trump White House represents an “assault on the rule of law,” asserting that “silence… is now intolerable.”
Wolf began his DOJ career in 1974 after Watergate and often invokes the era as his moral touchstone. He credits former Attorney General Edward Levi — who oversaw the post-Watergate cleanup — with shaping his views.
Notably, Wolf’s departure does not open a judicial seat. He took senior status in 2013, and his seat was filled in 2014 by Obama appointee Indira Talwani.
In comments to The New York Times, Wolf said he hopes to serve as a public voice for “embattled judges” who feel unable to criticize the administration.
The Trump White House dismissed Wolf’s dramatic exit as proof that overtly political judges have no business on the bench.
“Judges that want to inject their own personal agenda into the law have no place on the bench,” spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told Fox News Digital.
She emphasized that the Trump administration — now in its second term — has prevailed repeatedly at the Supreme Court:
“With over 20 Supreme Court victories, the Trump Administration’s policies have been consistently upheld… despite an unprecedented number of legal challenges and unlawful lower court rulings,” Jackson said.
“And any other radical judges that want to complain to the press should at least have the decency to resign before doing so.”
In a separate development underscoring the administration’s legal momentum, the Supreme Court on Tuesday extended an emergency order allowing the Trump administration to continue withholding full November SNAP payments as Congress moved toward reopening the federal government.
The temporary stay — originally issued by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and now extended through Thursday — blocks a lower-court ruling that would have required immediate restoration of full benefits.
At issue is a fast-moving dispute over Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payments affecting more than 40 million Americans. Several related lawsuits may soon be moot as Congress finalizes legislation to reopen the government.
Advocacy groups claimed in emergency filings that millions of families have “now gone ten days without the help they need to afford food” and warned that children are struggling as the shutdown continues. Meanwhile, flight cancellations and other service disruptions have become some of the most visible consequences of the impasse.