[link removed]

Friday, February 14
Later today, we’re launching our new Trump Accountability Scoreboard in The Week, Marc's premium newsletter that breaks down the latest in politics, law, democracy and elections — the scoreboard will track the lawsuits against Trump's executive orders and where those actions currently stand. Upgrade today for $120/year or $10/month ([link removed]) to get it sent straight to your inbox.

** ON THE DOCKET THIS WEEK
------------------------------------------------------------


** * More lawsuits challenging Trump’s executive actions
* Alabama Congressional Maps Go on Trial
* Yes, the North Carolina Supreme Court election challenge is still ongoing

------------------------------------------------------------


** TRUMP ACCOUNTABILITY
------------------------------------------------------------


** More lawsuits challenging Trump’s executive actions
------------------------------------------------------------

Ever since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, there’s been a steady stream of lawsuits challenging his executive orders and administration’s actions. Nearly a month later, that hasn’t stopped. It’s been a busy week in the courts for the Trump administration, but luckily you have Democracy Docket it to break it all down for you. Let’s take a look:

The city of Baltimore sues to stop the dismantling of the CFPB

After a series of actions from the Trump administration to defund and dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Democracy Forward filed ([link removed]) a lawsuit on behalf of the city of Baltimore and the Economic Action Maryland Fund, to stop the attack on the nation’s financial watchdog agency. “Without CFPB, people in Baltimore would be more at risk of being tricked and trapped by shady financial practices, and the city would be forced to divert resources from other essential functions just to provide the same level of protection that residents enjoy now,” the lawsuit said.

Chair of Merits Systems Protection Board sues Trump for illegal termination

Cathy Harris, the chair of a board protecting government workers from unfair employment practices, sued ([link removed]) Trump’s administration Wednesday for illegally firing her. In her lawsuit, Harris said Trump “disregarded that clear statutory language.” She received a Feb. 10 email that said “On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position on the Merit Systems Protection Board is terminated, effective immediately.”

DOGE blocked from Treasury data after another lawsuit

Another loss for Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) this week after a federal judge blocked ([link removed]) its access to the Department of the Treasury’s payment systems. The order came after Democratic attorneys general from 19 states sued ([link removed]) Trump and the Treasury to block the department from granting access to its payments systems to DOGE. So far there’s been three lawsuits to block DOGE from accessing sensitive Treasury information, and the faux-agency remains blocked from access.

A federal judge ordered the White House to unblock funding for federal programs

After the Trump administration violated an order to unblock federal funding, a judge Monday issued another order ([link removed]) to resume payments for federal programs — including agencies like the National Institutes of Health. “The broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the Court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country,” the federal judge wrote ([link removed]) in his blistering order.

Pennsylvania governor sues Trump administration to release billions in federal funds

Even after two court orders to unfreeze federal funding, the Trump administration continues to be sued. On Thursday, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) sued ([link removed]) the Trump administration to unfreeze over $3 billion of federal funding allocated to his state’s agencies over the next several years.

“While multiple federal judges have ordered the Trump Administration to unfreeze this funding, access has not been restored, leaving my Administration with no choice but to pursue legal action to protect the interests of the Commonwealth and its residents,” Shapiro said ([link removed]) in a statement.


** ALABAMA
------------------------------------------------------------


** Alabama Congressional Maps Go on Trial
------------------------------------------------------------
[link removed]

A trial kicked off in the Northern District of Alabama Monday over a years-long redistricting battle that will determine Black representation in Alabama’s congressional delegation through 2030.

If this sounds familiar to you, it’s because back in 2023 the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a big win for voters in Allen v. Milligan — a challenge to Alabama’s congressional maps — when it upheld ([link removed]) Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). The trial that happened this week will determine if Alabama violated Section 2 when it drew a map with only one majority-Black district, despite a court order requiring two districts where Black Alabamians had an opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice.

Back in 2021, two groups of voters and non-profits sued ([link removed]) then-Secretary of State John Merrill and the co-chairs of the Legislative Committee on Reapportionment challenging the congressional map drawn by legislators after the 2020 census. They alleged the 2021 map diluted the voting strength of Black Alabamians by packing some into district 7, which contains parts of the Birmingham and Montgomery metropolitan areas, and cracking the rest among majority-white districts. The two lawsuits were later consolidated into one, Allen v. Milligan.

After the Supreme Court ruling, which blocked Alabama from using the 2021 map, the state adopted a new map in July 2023 to resolve the Section 2 violation in the previous one. But the new map still only had one majority-black district and the plaintiffs challenged it on the basis that it failed to provide two districts where a Black-preferred candidate has a meaningful chance of being elected, as the court ordered.

In September 2023, the federal court temporarily halted ([link removed]) the use of the 2023 map and ordered a special master and cartographer to draw a new map for the 2024 election. Alabama appealed to the Supreme Court once again to pause the decision, but was denied ([link removed]) .

Thus a remedial plan created two districts where Black Alabamians could have an opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. In 2024, the second majority-Black district elected Rep. Shomari Figures (D), making it the first time Alabama sent two Black representatives to Congress. Plaintiffs are now urging the court to permanently block the 2023 map and order the remedial plan to be used for all future elections through 2030. Read more about the legal battle over Alabama’s congressional maps here ([link removed]) . ([link removed])


** NORTH CAROLINA
------------------------------------------------------------


** Yes, the North Carolina Supreme Court election challenge is still ongoing
------------------------------------------------------------

It’s been nearly three months since Jefferson Griffin lost his election for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court (NCSC), and yet he’s still challenging the results. Specifically, Griffin is challenging the North Carolina State Board of Election’s (NCSBE) decision to count 60,000 ballots cast by voters with allegedly incomplete voter registrations, overseas voters who have never resided in North Carolina and overseas voters who did not provide photo ID with their absentee ballots.

On Feb. 7, the Wake County Superior Court rejected ([link removed]) Griffin’s petitions and affirmed the board’s decision to count the challenged ballots. But Griffin, unsatisfied with that ruling, appealed ([link removed]) the trial court’s ruling on Monday to the North Carolina Court of Appeals. In response to Griffin’s motion to expedite the appeal, the NCSBE said ([link removed]) that it’s planning to respond by filing a bypass petition straight to the state Supreme Court. Should that happen, the NCSC would need to rule 4-2 for Griffin to win his appeal.

Meanwhile, there continues to be action on the docket in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. While the 4th Circuit affirmed ([link removed]) the district court’s decision to remand the case back to state court, the NCSBE filed a motion for immediate issuance of mandate, to allow the federal district court to retain jurisdiction of federal questions — if any remain after litigation ends in state court.

It may all sound a tad confusing, but finality in the contentious North Carolina Supreme Court election is coming soon — we hope. Read more about Jefferson Griffin’s North Carolina Supreme Court Election challenge here ([link removed]) . ([link removed])


** OPINION
------------------------------------------------------------


** Elon Musk Hollows Government So Trump Can Refill It
------------------------------------------------------------
[link removed]

Ever since he returned to the White House, Trump has empowered Musk and his gang to rummage through sensitive databases and access critical information in key federal agencies and departments. They have reportedly gained complete access to the Treasury Departments payment system — a system with detailed information on nearly everyone who has received payments from the federal government. And, presumably, the ability to decide who to pay and who to stiff.

“We cannot ignore how shockingly abnormal it is for a private citizen — who himself has contracts with the federal government — to dispatch a private army of executives, data experts and recent high schoolers to dictate policies to federal agencies,” Marc writes. Read more here ([link removed]) . ([link removed])


** NEW EPISODE
------------------------------------------------------------


** Are We in a Constitutional Crisis?
------------------------------------------------------------

President Trump’s affiliates have suggested that judges are overstepping their power by blocking his executive actions. Congress seems uninterested in protecting its own legislation and the “power of the purse.” Is the United States in a full-blown constitutional crisis? Marc shares his thoughts. Watch on YouTube here ([link removed]) .


** What We’re Doing
------------------------------------------------------------

News Editor Sally Holtgrieve is cracking open her advanced copy ([link removed]) of “MURDER THE TRUTH: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful” by David Enrich. It’s an in-depth expose on the campaign to overturn sixty years of Supreme Court free speech precedent and to silence dissent. Enrich’s reporting and storytelling focuses on one of the most important free speech decisions—New York Times v. Sullivan—and the ongoing, secret efforts of right-wing politicians and moneyed elites to overturn Sullivan in order to muzzle the media and their critics.
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]

This is a weekly newsletter that provides the highlights of the week, along with our analysis and recommendations for how you can get involved. For questions about your subscription or general support, visit our FAQ page here ([link removed]) . You canupdate your preferences ([link removed]) or unsubscribe from this list ([link removed]) .

View email in browser ([link removed]) .