A former top federal prosecutor has sharply criticized White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller for describing a judge’s decision as a “legal insurrection,” calling the remark both “absurd” and “a self-cancelling oxymoron.”
Miller made the controversial comment during a press briefing on Monday, where he defended President Donald Trump’s recent criticism of federal judges who blocked his orders to deploy National Guard troops to Oregon.
Asked by a reporter whether he was suggesting the president should take action against judges who issue rulings he disagrees with, Miller responded, “No, it’s simply a factually accurate statement that when a judge assumes for himself or herself the powers that have been delegated by the Constitution to the president, that is a form of illegal insurrection.”
When pressed further, Miller doubled down, saying, “We have seen, over the last nine months, an ongoing legal insurrection in which district court judges, as a class in many cases, have issued rulings that are flagrantly unlawful and unconstitutional.”
His remarks were in reference to federal court rulings that temporarily halted Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, amid protests near an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility.
Preet Bharara, former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, condemned Miller’s statement in a strongly worded essay published on Substack. Bharara said the phrase “legal insurrection” was nonsensical and a dangerous distortion of democratic principles.
“Trump adviser Stephen Miller … recently took to X to label that federal judge’s ruling itself a ‘legal insurrection.’ What the hell even is that?” Bharara wrote. “It’s a self-cancelling oxymoron, as absurd as saying nonviolent war or lawful terrorism. By definition, an insurrection is a violent uprising against authority. Legal process, on the other hand, is the authority of law and action.”
He added, “You can’t have a legal insurrection any more than you can have a peaceful war. The phrase collapses under its own weight. It’s nonsense and dangerous nonsense at that. It’s a rebellion against logic and an insult to the rule of law.”
Bharara compared Miller’s hyperbole to comments made by Senator Mike Lee of Utah, who once called a judicial decision a “judicial coup.” He argued that such rhetoric erodes public faith in the courts.
“To these two educated but ignorant MAGA men, even a mundane constitutional process is treachery,” Bharara said. “Mere disagreement is an insurrection or a coup. Everything is an attempted overthrow of the government, except, of course, actual violence on January 6th.”
He concluded by urging critics like Miller to use proper legal channels if they disagree with judicial rulings. “That’s how it’s done,” Bharara said. “What you don’t do is hurl epithets like insurrection at a judge for doing her job.”