[[link removed]]

JUDGES CURB TRUMP’S SWEEPING EXECUTIVE ACTIONS  
[[link removed]]


 

Ella Lee and Zach Schonfeld
February 7, 2025
The Hill
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Trump has signed dozens of executive actions since returning to the
Oval Office last month, flooding the zone with orders and statements
zigzagging through different policy areas. _

U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman at her nomination hearing in
Washington on May 12, 2021. She issued an injunction against Trump's
attempt to overthrow birthright citizenship., Rod Lamkey /
CNP/MediaPunch/Alamy file

 

Federal judges are curbing President Trump’s sweeping directives to
reshape the government, issuing a flurry of rulings blocking his
agenda from charging forward.   

More than three dozen lawsuits have been filed challenging major Trump
administration actions from gender to immigration to federal employee
protections. 

Many of the plaintiffs sought speedy relief and warned of imminent
harm, leading to an extravaganza of emergency hearings this week in
courtrooms across the country. 

“The environment that exists right now within the administration and
the political appointees — from whatever it is now to tomorrow
morning might as well be an eternity for us,” said Mark Zaid, an
attorney for FBI agents who worked on Jan. 6 cases suing to block the
release of their names, at a hearing this week. 

Trump has signed dozens of executive actions since returning to the
Oval Office last month, flooding the zone with orders and statements
[[link removed]]
zigzagging through different policy areas.  

Those directives have drawn swift legal challenges, filling judges’
calendars across the country — especially in Washington, where more
than 20 new suits have brought the federal courthouse’s halls and
courtroom galleries back to life after weeks of little action. Federal
judges in Washington scheduled hearings in eight lawsuits this week
alone. 

The change in administration has also brought a change in favorable
venues. Many cases have been filed along the coasts in places like
Seattle, Boston, and Maryland, a shift from when Republican-led
challenges to the Biden administration were regularly filed in Texas
and Missouri. 

Though many of Trump’s actions have faced challenges, none has come
under as much legal scrutiny as his order restricting birthright
citizenship
[[link removed]]
for children born on U.S. soil to parents in the country illegally. 

Judges have excoriated the administration this week as they blocked it
nationwide under the 14th Amendment. 

“No court in the country has ever endorsed the president’s
interpretation. This court will not be the first,” said U.S.
District Judge Deborah Boardman, a Biden appointee, Wednesday as she
blocked the order. 

The next day, a Reagan-appointed federal judge went as far to accuse
Trump of ignoring the rule of law
[[link removed]]
as the judge again blocked his order. 

“The rule of law is, according to him, something to navigate around
or simply ignore, whether that be for political or personal gain.
Nevertheless, in this courtroom and under my watch, the rule of law is
a bright beacon,” said U.S. District Judge John Coughenour. 

Late Thursday, the Justice Department commenced its appeal of
Coughenour’s ruling, marking the first time an appeals court will
weigh in on one of Trump’s executive actions.  

Beyond the birthright citizenship order, which faces nine lawsuits,
judges have also moved to block some of his moves on pausing federal
funding and gender. 

A federal judge this week universally blocked Trump’s order
mandating that transgender women in federal prison be moved to men’s
facilities and the government stop paying for their gender-affirming
care. 

And it came only after a federal judge in Rhode Island blocked the
Trump administration’s widespread federal funding pause
[[link removed]],
though lawyers for several states who sued indicated Thursday that the
administration may not be fully abiding by the order.  

Other cases are moving in that direction.  

For nearly six hours Thursday, a federal judge in Washington mediated
discussions between the government and lawyers for 16 FBI agents who
worked on Jan. 6 cases, who sued over the possibility of their names
being publicized.

On Friday, the Trump administration agreed not to publicly release
[[link removed]]
the names of FBI agents who played a role in investigations tied to
the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack without providing two days’ notice.
The judge set a preliminary injunction hearing for March 25.

A federal judge in Massachusetts on Thursday also pushed back the
deadline
[[link removed]]
for federal workers to accept Trump’s sweeping buyout offer, as the
court is set to weigh the merits of the bid to block the “deferred
resignation” program Monday. 

The deluge of challenges has thrown Trump’s Justice Department into
the deep end. 

“Daniel, I can only imagine how busy you and your office are these
days, just from reading the press,” U.S. District Judge John
McConnell, who oversees the Rhode Island case, told Justice Department
attorney Daniel Schwei on Thursday. “And I know the states are as
well, and they come from far and wide.” 

When Schwei appeared in a different case this week, U.S. District
Judge Loren AliKhan told the DOJ lawyer she hoped she did not “ruin
your Saturday” by establishing a weekend deadline.  

“But this is important,” AliKhan said. 

Many legal experts believe some of the cases are ultimately destined
for the Supreme Court, where Trump appointed three justices during his
first term to cement the court’s 6-3 conservative majority. 

But as the lawsuits trudge through the trial courts, the justices have
been focused elsewhere. 

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson this week is at an event in the U.S.
Virgin Islands
[[link removed]].
Justice Clarence Thomas has become the go-to official to swear in many
of Trump’s nominees across the Washington area. Justice Sonia
Sotomayor Wednesday was in Louisville, Ky., to accept an award.
[[link removed]] 

But the question remains as to which case will reach the justices
first — and when? 

* Trump
[[link removed]]
* executive action
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]