Sure. Now, let me ask you, are there court orders that the executive cannot defy?
The answer is "no," but let me explain what I mean.
There is nothing any court can order that anyone cannot defy, so the executive is not unique in that respect. The only differences are 1) the authority vested in each party and 2) the consequences of defying said order.
Each order has its own set of consequences that is dependent on other magistrates to carry out.
In the case of the executive disagreeing with the judiciary, one must recognize that the court does not hold a superior position over either of the other two branches of government, but there are checks and balances to prevent abuse of power (except when, as we've seen over and over again -- including in this case -- the legislature and/or the executive refuse to stand up to the arbitrary whims of an increasingly brazen judicial oligarchy).
If the legislature believes the executive has not fulfilled the obligation of his office, they can remove him at their discretion. If they do not impeach and remove him, but the people disagree with his decision, they can replace him with someone else according to their laws concerning elections.
However, if he is upholding his oath of office, and the legislature and the people agree, he is safe from reprimand on that account, and the judiciary have not control over the force or the purse, so their decision carries the weight of neither.
The executive can choose to pursue, or not to pursue. A jury of our peers (a political body as well as a judicial one) can choose to convict or exonerate us.
And the legislature can change the law that we protested in our defiance of it, at their discretion.