CNN Panelist Admits Biden Also Pushed Legal Limits—But No ‘Crisis’ Talk There [WATCH]

Republican strategist Brad Todd criticized CNN for its selective coverage of executive actions, pointing out that the network did not question former President Joe Biden’s willingness to challenge Supreme Court rulings, while aggressively questioning whether President Donald Trump would defy court orders regarding his executive actions.

Todd made the remarks during a discussion on CNN, where the panel debated the legality of Trump’s recent executive orders, including his federal funding freeze and the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) access to personal data.

Todd specifically cited Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, which was struck down by the Supreme Court but was later revived through alternative executive actions.

Dennis Quaid’s #1 Warning for Americans

“This is not a new reality. Let’s rewind the tape. A couple of years ago, Joe Biden lost his plan for student loan forgiveness, if you will, at the Supreme Court. His quote was, ‘I will stop at nothing to do this.’ And he then proceeded to give up $48 billion of student loan debt in defiance of the Supreme Court,” Todd stated.

Amy @amyklobuchar go f*ck yourself.

Joe Biden bragged about ignoring the Supreme Court on his scheme to unilaterally cancel student loan debt:

“That didn’t stop us”pic.twitter.com/7vvLFlUowb https://t.co/O0Fla6U4nX

— Tony Seruga (@TonySeruga) February 11, 2025

CNN host Jim Sciutto pushed back, suggesting that Trump’s executive actions might be setting the stage for an outright defiance of court rulings.

Todd argued that CNN’s coverage was inconsistent, saying the network never speculated on whether Biden was “laying the groundwork” to defy the courts when he pledged to continue student loan forgiveness despite the Supreme Court ruling against it.

“When Joe Biden said ‘I will stop at nothing’ when he lost the student loan case, we didn‘t get on television and CNN didn‘t say, ‘I wonder if he’s laying the groundwork to defy the court.’ We don’t, we treat Republican presidents different than we treat Democratic presidents in this conversation,” Todd said.

The discussion comes as U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, an Obama appointee, issued a temporary restraining order on Saturday, siding with 19 Democratic state attorneys general who argued that granting DOGE full access to Treasury’s payment systems violates federal law.

Additionally, U.S. District Judge John McConnell filed a motion on Monday, ordering the Trump administration to comply with a previous restraining order issued on Jan. 31, temporarily blocking the administration’s efforts to pause federal grants and loans.

CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams responded to Todd’s argument, suggesting that Biden’s actions were not comparable to Trump’s.

“Certainly, I will give the president this. He has every right to challenge orders. He has every right to say the courts are wrong. He has every right to vindicate his rights,” Williams said.

However, Williams warned against any suggestion that Trump or Vice President JD Vance might outright refuse to follow court rulings.

“But when both he and JD Vance are making the argument that, well, there will come a day when we simply will not adhere to court orders, that to me is the big problem,” Williams added.

Todd also pointed to Biden’s commission to explore expanding the Supreme Court, arguing that Democrats have been working to undermine the legitimacy of the court for years.

CNN contributor Alex Thompson pushed back, suggesting that Trump’s approach to executive power was “pushing new limits.”

“Like Barack Obama did with the waters of the United States and the clean power plan and Joe Biden did the student loan act, presidents advancing executive policy to get to the Supreme Court and test the limits is as old as the presidency. This is not extraordinary,” Thompson said.

Williams agreed with Todd’s overall argument, highlighting the longstanding tension between executive power and judicial oversight.

With Trump’s executive orders facing immediate legal challenges, the debate over presidential authority and judicial intervention is expected to continue in the courts.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.