They're so much weaker than they want us to think they are
Orbán's out. J.D. Vance's weekend of shame. And a rant from the man at the White House. Also: The ballroom and the D.C. Circuit. And, for paid subscribers: Closing my tabs.
On Sunday, Victor Orbán conceded that he had lost re-election in Hungary — a seismic result not only for the people of Hungary but for the global community that has been faced with a number of would-be strongmen in Orbán’s mold in recent years, including in the United States.
Law Dork is not where you come for global reporting — or even, broadly speaking, foreign affairs reporting. Read those reporters and check out those experts in the coming days for a better understanding of what this means for Hungary, the region, and the world.
And yet, I would be remiss — in this moment in the U.S. — not to highlight how Orbán’s loss comes not only despite support from President Donald Trump generally but also in the aftermath of Vice President J.D. Vance’s in-person support for the now-defeated (weak)man.
It comes as Trump has overstepped — at home and globally — and as more and more people are realizing it. It comes as Vance also failed in his negotiations to end the war the Trump administration started with Iran.
It also comes with daily reminders that, even with Trump’s extreme unpopularity, Vance is nowhere near Trump’s level. He is even weaker, less charismatic a leader, and just a guy you know you don’t want around.
In the aftermath of Orbán’s loss, it was clear that Trump is aware of his precarious position.
After a 60 Minutes story about cardinals speaking out in the wake of Pope Leo’s statements critical of actions backed by the Trump administration, Trump lashed out at Pope Leo — the first pope born in the United States — with a deranged Truth social post declaring, “Pope Leo is WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy.” It went downhill from there.
It was not the response of a man with any confidence in his standing.
The coming weeks and months and even years are going to be difficult, but it is essential to realize what the people of Hungary made clear on Sunday: It can end if the people stand together.
Ballroom case goes back to Leon for action this week
On Saturday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, on a 2-1 vote, sent the challenge to President Trump’s ballroom plans back to U.S. District Judge Richard Leon to resolve questions about White House safety and security and about the relationship between “below-ground and above-ground stages“ of construction.
When Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, issued his opinion and preliminary injunction on March 31, he barred further construction of the ballroom with an exception for “actions strictly necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House and its grounds, including the ballroom construction site, and [to] provide for the personal safety of the President and his staff.“ He also stated at the time that the injunction would not take effect for 14 days.
Under Saturday’s order from the D.C. Circuit, the stay of the injunction taking effect was extended to Friday (April 17) and Leon is now to “promptly address” a motion pending before his court “to clarify how the injunction and its exception will ensure safety and security pending litigation.“
Although initial reporting framed the decision as a win for Trump by allowing construction to continue for now, the ruling from Judges Patricia Millett (Obama) and Brad Garcia (Biden) was largely a loss for Trump because it did not grant the government a stay pending appeal — instead allowing Leon to clarify the scope of the injunction while only extending the current stay on the injunction for a few more days.
In the dissent from Judge Neomi Rao (Trump), she made clear why this ruling was — in her view — a loss for Trump: “Because my colleagues’ remand for further factfinding constructively denies the government the stay to which it is entitled, I respectfully dissent.“
Expect Leon to act quickly this week — and expect another appeal from the Justice Department and another stay request whenever he does issue his ruling on the clarification questions.
Closing my tabs
For those who don’t know what this is, it’s my effort to give a little thank you to paid subscribers. “Closing my tabs” is, literally, me looking through the stories and cases open — the tabs open — on my computer and sharing with you all some of those I was unable to cover during the week but that I nonetheless want to let you know that I have on my radar. Oftentimes, they are issues that will eventually find their way back into the newsletter as a case discussed moves forward or something new happens that provides me with a reason to cover the story more in depth.
This Sunday, these are the tabs I am closing:
