The White House is increasing its attacks on the judicial branch in the wake of decisions that briefly blocked President Trump’s sweeping tariffs.

It’s a battle-tested playbook the administration has used before on a number of fronts with the courts, which have emerged as an even greater bulwark to the president’s policies in his second term, especially with a GOP Congress that has largely left him unchallenged.

At the same time, the Trump team’s verbal attacks on the judiciary are more intense than any other administration in recent U.S. history, and underscore the public relations battle the White House is engaging in.

That battle is intended to rile up Trump’s base, while also pressuring his opponents and the courts.

Deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller decried a three-judge panel’s ruling that initially halted Trump’s sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs as “judicial tyranny.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called it part of a “troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process.”

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, a typically mild-mannered adviser, attacked the panel as “activist judges.”

It echoed the same rhetoric Miller, Leavitt and others have routinely used to push back on judicial rulings that block or undermine the administration’s agenda on immigration, efforts to shrink the government and more. It is also similar to the way Trump attacked judges who handled his legal cases before he won a........

© The Hill