A senior federal judge in Boston said President Donald Trump thinks the American people won’t stand up for their constitutional rights, while suggesting the public should do so.
Senior US District Judge
It was a rare instance of a sitting judge publicly weighing in on Trump, his administration, and the public’s role in facing unconstitutional overreaches, particularly over free speech.
In a statement, White House spokesperson Liz Huston called it “an outrageous ruling that hampers the safety and security of our nation,” and said the administration will “immediately appeal this errant decision.”
In the final pages of the opinion, Young made sweeping statements about Trump and his administration. The judge quoted his wife saying that Trump “ignores everything and keeps bullying ahead.”
Young said Trump ignores the Constitution, civil laws, regulations, and other customs in enacting his agenda, but said that the president isn’t “entirely lawless.”
And Young said that Trump is the “master communicator of our time,” but that the president won’t accept “dissent or disagreement.” Young noted Trump’s attacks on members of Congress and the courts, saying that no other president “has so consistently and personally, attacked America’s independent judiciary.”
He said the background is “necessary” to frame Trump’s problem with the First Amendment, and to later create a remedy in the case.
“I fear President Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected,” Young said.
“Is he correct?” Young asked.
Young’s question came at the end of the ruling in which he quoted President Ronald Reagan, who appointed him to the bench.
“Freedom is a fragile thing and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction,” Reagan said during his 1967 inaugural address as governor of California. “It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people.”
Young said that he’s been “deeply moved” by Reagan’s words.
“As I’ve read and re-read the record in this case, listened widely, and reflected extensively, I’ve come to believe that President Trump truly understands and appreciates the full import of President Reagan’s inspiring message — yet I fear he has drawn from it a darker, more cynical message,” Young said.
Judicial Response
In a highly unusual move, Young also included in the ruling a postcard he received that referenced Trump, with the judge saying he hopes the opinion shows how the Constitution works.
At the top of the opinion, Young included an image of a handwritten postcard dated June 19. “Trump has pardons and tanks .... what do you have?” the postcard read.
Young said in response that, “Alone, I have nothing but my sense of duty. Together, We the People of the United States—you and me—have our magnificent Constitution.”
“Here’s how that works out in a specific case,” said the judge, who has served on the court since 1985.
At the end of the ruling, Young continued his message to the postcard’s writer. “I hope you found this helpful. Thanks for writing. It shows you care. You should,” Young said.
He added in a postscript that the author should visit the courthouse in Boston “and watch your fellow citizens, sitting as jurors, reach out for justice.”
“It is here, and in courthouses just like this one, both state and federal, spread throughout our land that our Constitution is most vibrantly alive, for it is well said that ‘Where a jury sits, there burns the lamp of liberty,’” Young said.
Margaret Hahn-DuPont, director of the Legal Skills in Social Context program at Northeastern University, said she’d never seen an opinion structured like Young’s, built around the anonymous postcard.
“He’s trying to bring not only the parties in the litigation who you’re typically writing for, but the country at large, and including this anonymous person and welcoming them in,” said Hahn-DuPont. “He’s treating the opinion as a civics lesson.”
She said that the opinion read as an “invitation to all of us to be engaging in this conversation at this time in our country.”
The case is American Association of University Professors et al v. Rubio et al, D. Mass., No. 1:25-cv-10685, 9/30/25
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story: