Trump’s Appeals Court Judges Quietly Power His Second-Term Legal Wins
President Donald Trump has quietly gained a strong legal advantage in his second term — not from the Supreme Court alone, but from a group that rarely draws public attention: the federal appeals court judges he appointed during his first presidency.
A recent analysis by The New York Times reveals that these judges have overwhelmingly sided with Trump’s administration whenever its actions were challenged in court during 2025. Their decisions have repeatedly overturned lower-court rulings and allowed key policies to move forward.
Appeals Courts Tilt Strongly Toward Trump
Throughout the year, judges appointed by Trump during his first term consistently reversed decisions made by district court judges during his second term. These reversals played a major role in reshaping early perceptions that the judiciary was acting as a roadblock to Trump’s efforts to expand executive authority.
The data shows a striking pattern:
-
Trump-appointed appellate judges voted 133 times in favor of his administration
-
They voted only 12 times against it
-
That amounts to 92% support for Trump’s policies
This level of alignment is significantly higher than that shown by appeals court judges appointed by other Republican presidents — and even higher than support from Trump’s own district court appointees.
A Shift From Judicial Neutrality?
In 2018, after Donald Trump sharply attacked a court decision by labeling the judge an “Obama judge,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. pushed back with a rare public statement. He emphasized that the U.S. judiciary does not operate along partisan lines, saying that there are no judges defined by the president who appointed them — only independent judges committed to upholding the rule of law.
However, recent voting patterns suggest that, at least at the appellate level, judicial philosophies are increasingly aligned with the presidents who appointed them.
Across the country’s 13 federal appeals courts, Trump’s appointees have emerged as the most reliable judicial supporters of his agenda.
Better Results Than Lower Courts, Just Behind the Supreme Court
According to the analysis, appellate courts ruled in Trump’s favor in about half of all cases related to his second-term policies. That success rate is higher than what he achieved in district courts but slightly lower than at the Supreme Court of the United States, where most rulings on his agenda came through emergency or preliminary decisions.
In total, more than 500 judicial orders across roughly 900 cases were reviewed, covering the period from January 20 to December 31, 2025.
Why This Matters
These findings highlight how deeply judicial appointments can shape a presidency long after the first term ends. While district courts may slow or block executive actions, appeals courts — often the final stop before the Supreme Court — are increasingly proving decisive.
For Trump, the judges he appointed years ago are now playing a central role in ensuring his policies survive legal scrutiny, quietly strengthening presidential power from behind the scenes.
