The unprecedented barrage of executive orders President Donald Trump has signed in his first weeks in office has been met with resistance from ordinary citizens all the way up to coalitions of state attorneys general.
The lawsuits were to be expected: The state of California convened a special legislative session at the end of last year just to approve additional funding for legal resources that would be needed at the dawn of the second Trump Age.
But if you’re finding it difficult to keep track of all the legal filings against Trump, you’re not alone.
Here we aim to help you make sense of the sheer volume of chaos that has surrounded the Oval Office since Jan. 20, with more details in the links provided. This is by no means an exhaustive list.
The Federal Funding Freeze
The Trump administration has attacked the federal and civil service relentlessly by taking a hacksaw approach to slashing funding.
The chaos kicked into high gear when the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo that froze all federal grants, ostensibly to allow the new administration time to review spending and ensure it aligns with its priorities. The idea was to weed out funding acknowledging environmental issues, diversity or social justice issues.
Two lawsuits were filed in close succession aiming to fight the general funding freeze. One was filed in Washington by the National Council of Nonprofits, and the other in Rhode Island by a coalition of state attorneys general. The former secured a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration, while the latter produced a temporary restraining order, which should have allowed federal money to flow as usual.
But evidence suggestsfunding is stillbeing held back. District Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island accused the Trump administration of violating “the plain text” of an order to halt the freeze, deeming the move by the administration “likely unconstitutional.” District Judge Loren AliKhan called a second memo purporting to rescind the first memo essentially “meaningless.”
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) joined the fight with a lawsuit alleging the Trump administration jeopardized some $2.2 billion worth of funds allocated to Pennsylvania for various projects.
The president also specifically targeted foreign aid: A Jan. 20 executive order placed a 90-day freeze on foreign aid while purporting to “reevaluate” where it goes. Not only does the move impact thousands of American jobs, but critics say the freeze threatens to erode the “soft power” that bolsters global public opinion of the United States.
A lawsuit filed by public health groups concerned about the demolition of the U.S. Agency for International Development prompted a federal judge in Washington to order the immediate release of humanitarian relief while the suit plays out in court. The judge ruled last week that the administration has failed to comply, and this week ordered the funds to be released.
Attacks On Workers And Unleashing DOGE
There are at least 14 active lawsuits right now against the Trump administration involving civil service workers, or people who have made careers for themselves working on behalf of the American public.
The suits allege some workers have been unlawfully removed from their jobs and that improper access has been given to billionaire Elon Musk’s government auditing agency, DOGE. For the past several weeks, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency — an unofficial organization that has amassed unprecedented power with little oversight — has been meddling in the operations of numerous official agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service and the Social Security Administration.
Many claims were filed on behalf of workers by representatives of the National Treasury Employees Union, the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility and the AFL-CIO.
At least 14 states have also filed suit in Washington federal court alleging that the powers Trump has given to Musk are unconstitutional. They say DOGE’s rummaging through sensitive records at OPM, the Department of Labor and other institutions runs afoul of privacy laws.
Responding to the states’ lawsuit last week, the White House made the odd claim that Musk is not actually the head of DOGE, but rather a “special government employee.” Nonetheless, Judge Tanya Chutkan did not issue a temporary restraining order, finding the state’s attorneys general had failed to prove they would suffer irreparable harm without it.
Similarly, a group of anonymous USAID workers sued Musk on unconstitutionality grounds, arguing that his “de facto” status as the administrator of DOGE isn’t enough to grant him sweeping access to private information.
Other groups to sue over privacy and data security concerns include the AFGE and the Service Employees International Union, who allege DOGE was given improper access to the federal government’s payment systems.
The American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations have so far failed to keep DOGE out of student loan data at the University of California. A Washington federal judge ruled against them, saying he saw no evidence to suggest DOGE’s access would directly cause the disclosure of sensitive data or borrower information. The judge allowed time for DOGE to explain itself in more detail, however.
Still more lawsuits are aiming to halt mass firings.
Federal workers’ unions including the AFGE sued the OMB Monday in response to its email demanding federal workers justify their continued employment or else face termination.
The National Treasury Employees Union said in a lawsuit that the attempted dismantling of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and firing of its director and staff violates separation of powers rules enshrined in the Constitution, prompting a federal judge to order a pause on the administration’s takedown of the agency.
In a lawsuit brought by five unions against Trump and a number of federal agencies, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper denied the unions’ bid to secure a restraining order to halt any more firings. Cooper said the unions lacked jurisdiction and would need to go before the Federal Labor Relations Board.
Career intelligence officials, including CIA employees, have also sued to stop their removal under the administration’s executive order purporting to end “illegal DEI” initiatives. Thanks to a judge’s order, they are allowed to remain on the job, for now.
Attacks On Human Health, Civil Rights And The Environment
A coalition of 22 state attorneys general led a lawsuit in Massachusetts federal court arguing that a new rule implemented by the National Institutes of Health impacted billions in funding that had already been pledged for life-saving research. Judge Angel Kelley has granted the coalition a temporary restraining order that she agreed to keep in place until further notice.
Trump campaigned hard on rolling back rights for transgender Americans. Last month, he signed an executive order targeting institutions that provide gender-affirming care for people under age 19 — including 18-year-old adults. In response, some hospitals around the country stopped providing that care.
The American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal filed suit in Maryland federal court on behalf of transgender youth who have seen their appointments and therapies canceled. Judge Brendan Hurson temporarily blocked Trump’s executive order.
Meanwhile, in Washington, a group of trans service members and prospective recruits sued the administration over an order banning transgender people from the military, alleging Trump is violating equal protection laws. During a hearing, a judge delivered a thundering rebuke of one Justice Department lawyer who was forced to concede that “the government is not going to speculate on what Jesus would say about these things.”
“I’m sorry,” the lawyer added.
Citizenship Under Siege
One of Trump’s first executive orders aimed to end birthright citizenship, a right enumerated in the Constitution since 1868.
According to Trump’s order, if a child’s father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident and the child’s mother is “unlawfully present” in the country, the child is not automatically granted citizenship. The same goes for a mother who is lawfully in the country but only on a temporary basis, such as someone with a student visa.
Four federal judges have put a temporary stop to the order while legal challenges wind their way through the court system on behalf of sets of plaintiffs including several pregnant women, immigrant advocacy groups, state attorneys general and others. Maryland’s Judge Deborah Boardman said in her ruling that “no court in the country has ever endorsed the president’s interpretation,” and added, “This court will not be the first.”
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt the administration a significant setback last week when a panel of judges unanimously denied Trump’s emergency request seeking to unwind an injunction by a Washington state judge.
The judges admonished the administration for trying to rush through “substantive issues” and treating every one of their requests as urgent. Decisions, the panel said, need to be free from “ideology or political preference,” or the public may question “whether we are politicians in disguise.”
The Powers Of The Presidency
The Trump administration is pushing the limits of the executive branch, attempting to fire officials tasked with conducting critical oversight of the government.
In one case, what started out as a curt email attempt to fire a federal official who oversees the enforcement of anti-corruption laws morphed into the Trump administration’s first full-blown appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel, was notified that he had been fired in early February despite being confirmed by the Senate for a five-year term last March. Federal law says anyone working as special counsel can only be removed for negligence of duty or malfeasance. A federal judge reinstated Dellinger and Trump appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court agreed to temporarily let Dellinger stay in his role while a lower court considered whether to extend a halt to his dismissal. The lower court said Wednesday that Dellinger can stay at least through March 1 as the case progresses.
Another lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and a slew of administration officials. Eight inspectors general — representing the departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, State, Agriculture, Education, and Labor, and the Small Business Administration — say they were unlawfully removed from their posts en masse and that a more thorough review must be conducted before they are terminated. A hearing is slated for March.
Threats Of Retaliation Against The Free Press And Political Adversaries
A new era has descended on the Justice Department amid legal battles over freedom of the press and privacy.
Last week, The Associated Press sued three Trump administration officials over access to presidential press conferences and other events. The AP’s reporters have been barred from taking part in the White House press pool for two weeks due to the outlet’s refusal to solely refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America,” the name Trump chose for the body of water by executive order.
On Monday, a federal judge declined to order the White House to reverse course, although he urged officials to reconsider their ban.
A group of FBI agents who fear retaliation by the Trump administration are in the midst of a legal battle to keep their names private. The agents sued the Justice Department in early February saying they are being targeted for termination because they worked on investigations tied to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol as well as Trump’s Mar-a-Lago documents case. Part of that retaliation, they fear, will eventually include the administration’s publication of a list with their names and other identifying information.
Lawyers for the agents say some FBI personnel have already seen their information circulating on the dark web and that appetites are whetted for their harassment. For now, a federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order barring any release of FBI staff names or case assignments publicly without the government first asking the court for permission and with at least 48 hours’ notice.
Go Ad-Free — And Protect The Free Press
Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.
Meanwhile, after case records associated with a Jan. 6 defendant mysteriously vanished, a group of 14 media organizations blew the dust off a 2021 court order directing the preservation of evidence and other key records associated with the attack on the Capitol. A federal judge has directed the government not to delete or remove any further records from a portal accessible to lawyers and journalists until further notice. The Justice Department had a deadline Wednesday to identify any other records it has removed and explain why.