Federal Judge Blocks Donald Trump’s Sweeping Prosecution Order Targeting Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Mark Zuckerberg, and Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg

Judge Blocks Trump’s Sweeping Prosecution Order Targeting Swift, Obama, Beyoncé, Biden, and Others

Washington, D.C. — In a stunning legal rebuke, a federal judge has blocked former President Donald Trump’s sweeping prosecution order that sought to bring charges against a wide range of public figures — including pop superstar Taylor Swift, former President Barack Obama, President Joe Biden, music legends Bruce Springsteen and Beyoncé, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

The order, signed last week and immediately challenged in federal court, had drawn widespread criticism from legal experts who labeled it an unprecedented abuse of power. Trump, who has repeatedly claimed that his political opponents and critics have conspired against him, argued that the group had engaged in “corruption, election interference, and cultural sabotage.”

Judge Marianne Keller of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the order on constitutional grounds, calling it “a dangerous overreach of authority with no basis in law.” In her ruling, she emphasized that Trump, as a private citizen and political candidate, has no legal standing to issue binding prosecution orders, and that even a sitting president would face constitutional limits in directing criminal cases against individuals.

“The Constitution does not allow any one man — past or present — to weaponize the justice system against his critics and rivals,” Judge Keller wrote. “This order is not only unlawful but strikes at the very heart of democratic governance.”

The ruling was met with visible relief from those targeted. Taylor Swift, who has clashed with Trump over political issues in the past, issued a brief statement on social media: “Justice matters. No one should face prosecution for speaking out or creating art.” Bruce Springsteen called the order “a grotesque abuse of political theater,” while Beyoncé’s representatives declined to comment.

From the political sphere, President Biden labeled the move “proof that Trump’s vision of America is one where loyalty to him, not the law, decides who is punished.” Former President Obama struck a more measured tone, stating that “attempts to criminalize dissent and cultural influence are not new, but they are dangerous. The courts did the right thing.”

Alvin Bragg, who has previously pursued legal action against Trump, described the order as “an intimidation tactic designed to undermine the independence of prosecutors and the rule of law.”

Meanwhile, Trump lashed out at the ruling during a rally in Georgia, accusing Judge Keller of being part of a “deep state conspiracy” and vowing to continue his fight against what he called “corrupt elites.” “They want to silence me, but they’re really trying to silence you,” Trump told supporters. “I will never stop exposing the truth about these people.”

Legal scholars say the case underscores the limits of political retaliation through the courts. “If Trump’s order had been upheld, it would have opened the floodgates for any leader to criminalize opposition figures at will,” said Professor Daniel Ruiz, a constitutional law expert at Georgetown University. “This ruling is a reminder that the judiciary remains a guardrail against authoritarian impulses.”

With the ruling in place, Trump is expected to appeal, though experts predict the case will fail at higher courts as well. For now, the high-profile figures targeted by his order remain free of legal jeopardy, while the former president faces renewed scrutiny over his willingness to use the justice system as a political weapon.