I think he has seen the drawn out convoluted negotiations with
terrorists and does not want to be sucked into that scene.
His previous real estate business may have taught him to state what you
want and what you will do if you do not get what you want.
Then stick very closely to that.
What he has been doing recently is a practical demonstration to the terrorists.

Peter, you'll find the US legal system is a mess. Judges are very frequently appointed for their political views...that's when there is not actually an election for who will be the judge. So the system is quite unlike ours and full of activists.

Trump got to appoint some federal court judges, including on the Supreme Court, but he could only do that as positions become vacant, so there is no way he has appointed any but a small number of federal judges.

At a state level judges are appointed by state governments (when they're not elected by voters), and many of these cases mhaze refers to will start there, either because the plaintiffs are trying to use a state law to frustrate the president, or because they get to exercise a federal jurisdiction at first instant.

From the decisions that we've seen so far from the Supreme Court, the new appointments by Trump are more likely than the previous ones to abide by the Constitution because they are "originalists", meaning they don't believe they should be reinterpreting the constitution in line with their prejudices. That's why Roe v Wade was reversed - it was an invention of former judges and had no basis in the constitution.