Topline
On Saturday evening, a federal judge overturned President Donald Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport migrants via an executive order. The ruling even instructed the administration to redirect flights that had already taken off. This marks yet another judicial decision opposing actions by both Trump and budget-cutting chief Elon Musk.
Key Facts
Judge James Boasberg mandated an instant stop to President Trump’s directive for the expulsion of Venezuelan individuals whom he claims have ties to the criminal group known as Tren de Aragua. This ruling came about following a legal challenge filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of several immigrants. including People from Venezuela claimed they were being deported despite having no connection to Tren de Aragua.
Boasberg prevented the Trump administration from deporting any migrants under the executive order for a minimum of 14 days, or until further orders in the case are issued. During the hearing, he stated that all flights—including those en route—should be stopped and the migrants sent back to the U.S., as reported. Politico .
It remains uncertain how effectively the Trump administration adhered to that directive, given that Secretary of State Marco Rubio is overseeing this process. said Early Sunday, the administration had dispatched over 250 members of Tren de Aragua to El Salvador.
Dozens of lawsuits have been filed by plaintiffs such as Democratic attorneys general, federal employees, labor unions, nonprofit organizations, and various interest groups against actions taken by the Trump administration following his inauguration. As Republicans gained control over both the presidency and Congress, legal challenges became the main method for Democrats to contest Trump's policies.
Many of these legal cases are still being decided in courts; however, several interim decisions have been made. These rulings temporarily halt certain policies as the legal process continues or maintain various directives until a final decision is reached.
So far, permanent rulings have only been made in two instances—both involving the dismissals of particular federal employees—but these decisions might still be reversed by higher courts through an appeals process.
This indicates that all legal proceedings remain open to modification: The judges who have thus far supported the Trump administration might still deliver decisions that invalidate certain policies, and conversely, judgments either supporting or opposing the government will probably face appeals in superior courts.
Where Did Trump Succeed in Winning Cases?
- USAID Staffers: Trump-appointed Judge Carl Nichols ruled On Feb. 21, the Trump administration has the option to put USAID employees on leave, overturning an earlier decision he had taken opposing such action by the government once the administration files its submission. filing guaranteeing that employees on leave would maintain their governmental safeguards. Subsequently, he declined to grant an injunction preventing the Trump administration from ending contracts of USAID personnel during a hearing held on March 6.
- Firing Hampton Dellinger: The appellate court in Washington, D.C., on March 5 halted A lower court ruling stopping the Trump administration from ending Dellinger’s appointment, who has questioned Trump’s widespread dismissals during his tenure as head of the Office of Special Counsel, a regulatory body. This decision essentially permits Dellinger to be dismissed from his position while the case navigates the appeals process, leaving Dellinger accepted The court's decision on Thursday was acknowledged by him, indicating he won’t pursue additional appeals. Dellinger’s situation was the initial one to reach the Supreme Court; they had previously allowed him to remain at his position last month as well. ruling 7-2 not to override a court order.
- NYC FEMA Funds: A federal judge rejected New York City's attempt to reclaim $80 million in FEMA funds that the Trump administration withdrew, despite these funds having already been distributed, according to several sources. outlets report , stated during a hearing on March 5 that there is currently no urgency to fulfill the city's request as the legal proceedings are still ongoing.
- CIA Employees: CIA Director John Ratcliffe has the authority to dismiss staff members who held positions associated with diversity, equity, and inclusion, as determined by Judge Anthony Trenga during a court session on Thursday, according to several reports. reports , following the lawsuit initiated by the employees to prevent their termination—as reported by The New York Times reporting The judge stated that according to "fundamental fairness," the employees should not have been terminated; however, Ratcliffe possesses the legal authority to dismiss them.
- Associated Press: Judge Trevor McFadden let The Trump administration continues to prevent Associated Press (AP) reporters from attending significant White House events—for now—after denying the AP’s appeal to reinstate their journalists' access. This move came as punishment because the AP had instructed its staff to continue using the term "Gulf of Mexico," despite President Trump's directive to rename it the "Gulf of America."
- Elon Musk’s Authority: Judge Tanya Chutkan denied Efforts by Democratic attorneys general to prevent Musk and DOGE from obtaining federal information or making personnel choices — as the states claim Musk acts like "an agent of chaos" without the right to make extensive governmental decisions — were noted. Although Judge Chutkan showed worry over Musk's authority in her February 18th decision and hinted at potentially ruling against him later on.
- Access to Dogecoin Labor Statistics: Judge John Bates has rejected the labor unions' plea to prevent DOGE from obtaining access to Labor Department data two times, at least until the legal proceedings continue further. ruling the plaintiffs lacked standing, and subsequently ruling On Feb. 14, the plaintiffs failed to adequately demonstrate that their claims were likely to be successful—despite Bates expressing "grave reservations regarding the privacy issues highlighted by this case."
- Federal Worker Buyouts: Judge George O'Toole allowed a deadline to pass without action from federal employees regarding a voluntary severance package. ruling On Feb. 12, the labor unions attempting to contest the buyout proposal were found not to have the legal right to file the lawsuit, despite having previously extended the deadline multiple times.
- Federal Employee Emails: Judge Randolph Daniel Moss denied A attempt by federal employees to prevent the government from dispatching bulk emails to staff via what was claimed to be an insecure email server resulted in the court ruling on February 17 that the plaintiffs were improbable to demonstrate they possessed sufficient standing to file the lawsuit.
Where Has Trump Failed In Legal Battles?
- Alien Enemies Act: Judge James Boasberg blocked Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelan nationals believed to have a connection to criminal organization Tren de Aragua, issuing an order March 15 that immediately halted deportations under the order, including directing the administration to turn flights around containing the affected migrants.
- Birthright Citizenship: After the Boston-based 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, Trump requested for the Supreme Court intervention. denied The Trump administration’s effort to restore the executive order that would terminate birthright citizenship was scheduled for March 12, making it the third federal appeals court to address this issue. ruled Opposed to the Trump administration regarding this matter, four federal district judges halted Trump's directive aimed at revoking birthright citizenship for children born to individuals who are not citizens or permanent residents, with all current rulings siding against Trump thus far.
- Some Federal Worker Firings: Judge William Alsup reversed The Trump administration’s widespread dismissals of provisional workers were overturned on March 13 when a judge ordered their reinstatement across multiple departments including Defense, Veterans Affairs, Energy, Treasury, and Agriculture. The judge determined that the directive leading to these terminations was illegal. This decision followed Judge Beryl Howell's review. ruled Trump’s firing of National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox was a “blatant violation” of federal law in an order March 6, after Judge Rudolph Contreras, an Obama appointee, issued a permanent injunction keeping Cathy Harris, who serves on the Merit Systems Protection Board that protects federal workers, in her role after Trump terminated her. The judge ruled Trump’s firing violated federal law requiring officials to only be removed for “malfeasance.”
- Law Firm Access: Judge Beryl Howell on March 12 blocked aspects of an executive order That prohibits the federal government from engaging in transactions or exchanging information with Perkins Coie, a prominent law firm that formerly represented Hillary Clinton. The firm contends this action is an illegal form of retaliation for representing Donald Trump’s political rival, which they claim might result in their firm shutting down.
- DOGE Records: Judge Christopher Cooper ordered To adhere to a regulatory body's demand for documentation pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, the court ruled on March 10 that the organization led by Musk must comply with requests concerning its finances, organizational setup, and interactions with other governmental entities.
- Funding Freeze: Two federal judges halted the Trump administration's contentious order to suspend nearly all federal grants, after Judge John McConnell reaffirmed his decision on February 10. ordering The government was asked to restart funding following claims from the organizations involved in the lawsuit that the Trump administration had failed to release the necessary funds. Subsequently, McConnell made a further statement. lasting order On March 6, this maintains the block in position as the legal proceedings unfold.
- NIH Grant Funding On February 10, Judge Angel Kelley made her decision. blocked A modification by the NIH to establish a standard 15% reimbursement rate for certain expenses related to medical research—a practice previously handled through individual negotiations—following arguments from healthcare institutions and hospitals that this alteration contravened appropriate federal protocols. Kelley subsequently extended That ruling on March 5 means the Trump administration will not be able to enforce the 15% tariff anytime soon as the legal battle continues.
- Probationary Worker Firings: On February 27, Judge William Alsup instructed the Office of Personnel Management to temporarily reverse a memo pushing entities such as the Department of Defense to dismiss numerous recently hired "probationary" employees. reportedly said In hearings, OPM’s actions—which were part of an extensive strategy aimed at reducing the federal workforce—were deemed potentially unlawful. Critics argued that the office "has absolutely no authority under any statute ever enacted to hire or dismiss employees from another agency." This criticism came as part of the Trump administration's initiatives. argues The OPM did not call for widespread layoffs; they merely requested that agencies assess their probationary employees.
- Refugee Admissions: On February 25th, after a hearing, Judge Jamal Whitehead halted President Trump's directive halting refugee entries. This decision came as a result of a legal challenge from organizations aiding refugees. The judge concluded that Trump’s action essentially invalidated Congressional intent since the refugee program had been created by legislative authority.
- Access to Dogecoin for StudentLoan Information: A federal judge based in Maryland blocked The Department of Government Efficiency gained access to information at both the Office of Personnel Management and the Department of Education on February 24, including details about student loans. This occurred as a lawsuit initiated by the American Federation of Teachers along with federal employees continues to progress, despite another district court handling it differently. denied A group of University of California students has requested to prevent DOGE from accessing their loan information.
- Access to Doge Treasury Information: DOGE has been barred from accessing Treasury Department information as the legal proceedings continue, following Judge Jeanette Vargas' ruling. blocked On February 21, DOGE gained access to Treasury data in response to a lawsuit filed by Democratic attorneys general. This development followed a prior decision from another federal judge that resulted in a narrower outcome. granting view-only access for two particular DOGE employees. Another federal judge denied An independent attempt was made to halt DOGE’s operations within the agency on March 7; however, this decision does not impact the other ruling prohibiting DOGE access to Treasury information.
- DEI: In response to the Trump administration's extensive attempts to dismantle initiatives focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion, federal judges have halted the government's actions. efforts to hold back any "equity-related" federal grants dismiss Civil servants employed in DEI roles at federal intelligence agencies, for now as long as this legal action continues.
- Transgender Rights: The limitations imposed by the Trump administration on transgender rights have thus far been partly halted by judicial decisions. multiple judges delivering decisions that prevent the Trump administration from confining transgender female prisoners in men's penitentiaries, with other judgments having temporarily blocked The government's limitations on gender-affirming healthcare for young people. A federal judge ruled On Feb. 28, the Trump administration is barred from enforcing limitations on gender-affirming treatments for young people or using federal money to support "gender ideology," but this ruling applies solely to the four states that filed the lawsuit: Colorado, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington.
- Health Websites: Bates ordered The Trump administration was ordered to reinstate health-related government sites that were shut down post-Trump's inauguration, as ruled on February 11. This decision came about because Doctors for America contended that removing such information broke federal laws and adversely affected their members due to lost data.
What Is the Supreme Court’s Decision?
- Foreign Aid: The Supreme Court ruled On March 5, with a vote of 5-4, they upheld Judge Jude Amir Ali’s decision compelling the Trump administration to release funds for international assistance related to completed projects. This was following an earlier stance taken by Chief Justice John Roberts. temporarily halted The decision came during the court's deliberations. This verdict significantly hampers Trump’s efforts to cut funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh disagreed with this ruling; notably, Alito expressed his shock at what he perceived as the majority believing a single district-court judge—who may not have proper jurisdiction—could wield uncontrolled authority to mandate the U.S. government distribute, potentially indefinitely losing control over, $2 billion in tax money.
- Hampton Dellinger: Though a lower appeals court later allowed his firing, the Supreme Court temporarily kept him in his job in February, ruling 7-2 decided not to overturn a court order preventing the Trump administration from dismissing Dellinger until receiving additional instructions from the court. NPR reports Following an appeals court ruling permitting his termination instead of pursuing another hearing at the Supreme Court, Dellinger concluded his legal proceedings. On March 6, he stated, "Although I strongly disagree with the circuit court’s decision, I accept and will adhere to it."
Which Lawsuits Are Remaining?
Immigration: Legal proceedings continue regarding the freeze on finances allocated for refugee placements, limitations on asylum claims, operations targeting so-called sanctuary municipalities, halting the humanitarian admission initiative, cutting financial resources to sanctuary towns, border patrol agents accessing religious institutions, limiting subsidies to organizations involved with migration issues, swift deportation of migrants, as well as the government discontinuing use of the CBP One application utilized by individuals seeking refuge.
Federal Workers: The extensive reductions in the federal workforce initiated by the Trump administration and DOGE have led to multiple legal challenges, including actions against the large-scale terminations and the dismissal of inspectors general by Trump. Former FEMA official Mary Comans sued On March 4, opposition arose regarding her termination, concurrently criticizing the Trump administration for wrongly asserting that she illicitly financed hotels for immigrants. Numerous legal actions have been initiated to contest Trump’s "Schedule F" directive, which streamlines the process for dismissing permanent civil service workers. Another unresolved lawsuit targets the DOJ’s approach towards individuals implicated in the January 6th probes. The judicial system has mandated that during this ongoing case, the government must refrain from publishing any roster listing FBI agents connected with these inquiries. Moreover, labor organizations that had earlier litigated against the Trump regime concerning widespread dismissals of federal staff members have submitted additional filings. amended complaint On Feb. 24, incorporate an additional challenge. Musk’s message to government employees Instructing employees to reply detailing their activities from the previous week or risk losing their jobs, as the unions contend that the Office of Personnel Management’s directive requiring staff to answer the email or suffer dismissal doesn’t adhere to established governmental protocols.
DOGE: Several ongoing lawsuits contest Trump’s jurisdiction over DOGE, while multiple parties are attempting to prevent Musk and his affiliates from obtaining information from agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Office of Personnel Management, Internal Revenue Service, and Social Security Administration. These legal actions span numerous areas. lawsuit Filed on March 5 by various advocacy organizations, the lawsuit aims to halt what they describe as Elon Musk's "unregulated dismantling of the federal government."
Transgender Rights: Legal challenges remain ongoing against several policies implemented during the Trump administration that restrict the rights of transgender individuals in America. These include prohibitions on transgender people participating in women’s athletics, mandates for passports to indicate one’s birth-assigned gender, as well as the reintroduction of bans preventing transgender service members from serving in the military.
Federal Funding: Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration to restore lost funding. The alleged cause was a federal funding freeze that led to Pennsylvania losing financial support despite court orders instructing for disbursement of these funds.
Climate Change: Environmental organizations filed lawsuits against the Trump administration following the president's directive allowing portions of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf to be utilized for oil and gas leasing—a move that overturned a decision made by former President Joe Biden. The plaintiffs contended that Trump had overstepped his legal bounds with this action. Additionally, environmental and agricultural groups initiated legal proceedings. lawsuit On Feb. 24, they confronted the U.S. Department of Agriculture, claiming harm due to the government's choice to remove data about climate change from official sites.
Congestion Pricing: The Metropolitan Transportation Authority of New York City has asked a federal court to overturn Trump’s order ordering the city to revoke its congestion pricing scheme, which imposes a daily charge on vehicles driving in the busier sections of Manhattan. The city contends that Trump does not have the authority to single-handedly terminate the initiative and insists that the program won’t be halted merely due to his directive, as it falls under state jurisdiction. However, they seek a judicial declaration stating that Trump’s action is "invalid and without effect."
What Have Statements From The Trump Administration Been Like In Court Proceedings?
The Trump administration has supported its policies in court despite their broad disagreement with the opinions of most legal scholars, like asserting that the 14th Amendment doesn’t ensure birthright citizenship. The administration’s legal representatives have faced significant examination due to the lawsuit initiated by Democratic-led states concerning Musk’s jurisdiction, prompting the government’s legal team to respond accordingly. downplay the billionaire’s influence , despite both Trump and Musk acknowledging the significant reductions made by the Tesla CEO. Additionally, the Justice Department’s lawyers have faced increased scrutiny for their roles. unable to inform the judges about the count of employees who were dismissed and identify which officials within the government served as administrators for DOGE, all before a federal judge saying He was "very wary" of the government's failure to clarify Musk's precise position.
What have judges told Trump and his lawyers?
Frequently, judges have critiqued the government's policies or clearly indicated that they contravene federal law, as demonstrated by Judge Lauren King. arguing The executive order prohibiting gender-affirming treatment for young people "poses significant risks to children" and acts as a "sledgehammer" toward achieving the administration’s aim of safeguarding minors. Judge John Coughenour, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, expressed this view in his ruling. ruling halting Trump’s directive on birthright citizenship by stating "the president does not possess the authority to modify, restrict, or alter this constitutional privilege through an executive order." Despite ruling in favor of the government at times, judges have shown reservations, as noted by Judge Chutkan. acknowledging In her decision permitting DOGE’s operations to proceed, she stated that Democratic-controlled states "rightfully challenge the seemingly unregulated power of an individual who was not elected," alluding to Musk.
Is Trump Complying With the Court's Directives?
So far, indeed. Legal experts sounded the alarm following Vice President JD Vance’s comments. suggested In February, when it was stated that "judges aren’t permitted to rein in the executive’s rightful authority," there hasn't been any evidence suggesting that the Trump administration deliberately disregarded judicial decisions. Moreover, the administration emphasized in legal documents that they were adhering to the court orders.
Could More Cases Be Heard By The Supreme Court?
Dellinger’s case and the USAID funding lawsuit are the sole cases brought before the Supreme Court since President Trump took office, but considering the significant impact of the current policy disputes, additional suits are expected to emerge. The outcome remains uncertain as the 6-3 conservative bench, featuring three nominees appointed by Trump, takes these matters into consideration. Legal analysts believe certain actions taken by the administration might exceed what this predominantly conservative tribunal would support. As an authority at Georgetown Law School, Professor Stephen Vladeck offers insights on this matter. wrote He doubted whether the Supreme Court would support the administration’s directive to halt federal funding, which grants Trump "the authority to refrain from spending any appropriated funds" by Congress.
What Additional Lawsuits Might Still be Filed?
A number of Trump’s policies have not yet led to legal challenges, though they might do so eventually. Policies that remain untested in courts include his decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization, impose tariffs on China, eliminate protections surrounding artificial intelligence, and revoke climate change measures implemented during the Biden administration, such as directing federal agencies not to release certain funds approved by Congress.
Further Reading
