Judges are getting fed up with Trump officials trying cases on social media, cable news

A federal judge rebuked the Donald Trump administration on Thursday from the bench, taking exception in part to a Truth Social posted by the president earlier this week.

Trump used his favourite social media platform on Tuesday, responding to a judge's ruling, to suggest that Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs (SNAP) benefits "will be given only when the Radical Left Democrats open up government," a reference to the partial government shutdown that is now the longest in U.S. history.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt tried to walk back Trump's post hours later, suggesting the administration would comply, but the damage was done.

In the eyes of the judge in the case, John McConnell, Trump "stated his intent to defy the court order." McConnell made his comments Thursday as he gave the White House another 24 hours to fund the November instalment for some 42 million SNAP recipients. The Trump administration signalled its intent to appeal that order.

Vice-President JD Vance lashed out at McConnell in the latest incident, a continuation of a trend that separates the second Trump presidential administration from the first.

McConnell's comments are just the latest example in which this administration's use of social media has been of no small consequence in the courts. In some cases, judges are expressing frustration with the inability of White House and Justice Department officials to let legal proceedings play out and refrain from spreading their personal beliefs on social media or cable news programs.

Here are some other examples:

As the second Trump administration drastically ramped up deportation efforts of unauthorized American residents compared to his first term, Democratic lawmakers sought access to federal facilities to see what kind of conditions detainees were being held in.

In early May, Newark's mayor and a handful of Democratic Congress members were prevented from accessing the Delaney Hall facility in that New Jersey city, in a scene that grew heated.

After the melee, first-term Rep. LaMonica McIver was subsequently indicted on three counts of assaulting, resisting, impeding and interfering with federal officials. The charges carry the potential for a years-long prison sentence if McIver is convicted.

After multiple complaints from McIver's legal representatives, the judge in her case in late October ordered the government to remove nine social media posts from accounts belonging to the Department of Homeland Security and one of its spokespersons. In those posts, McIver's actions were characterized as "criminal," part of "a reckless stunt by sanctuary politicians," and she was linked to "Antifa-aligned domestic extremism."

"It's not factual," U.S. District Judge Jamel Semper said on Oct. 21. "The prejudicial nature of it is self-evident."

Several posts were taken down, but an Immigration and Customs Enforcement post describing the 39-year-old McIver as having "attacked ICE officers" is still live.

While the SNAP legal battle and McIver prosecution have received national attention, another reproach of the federal government came in a less-noticed court proceeding in Utah last month.