President Donald Trump has criticized the Supreme Court for recent rulings that he claims have weakened democratic safeguards, calling them "shockingly bad" and warning that they could make it difficult for the country to recover. The court has made decisions that shield the president from federal laws meant to prevent corruption and election interference, allowed him to ignore congressional restrictions on starting wars, and permitted him to remove federal watchdogs. Some view the court as the final check against presidential overreach, while others argue it has misinterpreted its role in enforcing federal laws. The Supreme Court has asserted a power to override federal statutes, a move critics say has contributed to an unchecked presidency. They argue that the court has taken on the role of deciding which executive actions to uphold or reject, rather than strictly enforcing laws passed by Congress. To preserve democracy, some believe the next Congress must shift power away from judicial supremacy and create a court that is more accountable to federal law. Such a court would still have the authority to strike down actions violating the Constitution, but it would no longer be able to exempt the president from laws designed to limit his power. Historically, after the Civil War, Congress passed laws to protect Black voting rights in the South. President Andrew Johnson resisted these efforts, leading to the passage of the Tenure of Office Act, which aimed to limit presidential power. Johnson was impeached for firing a Cabinet member, but he was acquitted by a single Senate vote. Later, the Supreme Court used the case Myers v. United States to invalidate the Tenure of Office Act, weakening congressional checks on the presidency. In recent cases, such as Trump v. Slaughter, the court has cited Myers to strike down laws meant to hold the president accountable. Chief Justice John Roberts has emphasized the court’s role in protecting the president from congressional influence. The court has also allowed the president to proceed with a controversial construction project despite legal challenges, weakened the Voting Rights Act, and reduced restrictions on campaign financing. These decisions have raised concerns about the influence of "dark money" in elections and the erosion of protections for minority voters. The court has signaled that it will not support future legislative efforts to hold presidents accountable for corruption or overreach. To ensure that a president can be prosecuted for crimes and cannot dismantle the civil service or deploy agents into communities, Congress must pass laws that are enforceable. Some argue that the court has acted as a crucial check on presidential power in cases involving tariffs, election regulations, and citizenship laws. However, when the court ignores or rejects federal statutes, it risks weakening the system of checks and balances that underpin American democracy.