Trump administration reached more than 100 lawsuits since the inauguration

When Donald Trump tried to reshape the federal government at a very high speed, his government had experienced a litigation flood that challenged the legality of initial actions in the office.

With more than 100 federal lawsuits submitted since the inauguration, Trump and his government have been effectively sued three times for every working day he has held an Oval office.

Around 30 out of 100 lawsuits related to Trump’s immigration policy, while more than 20 cases directly challenged the actions of the Elon Musk government efficiency department. Ten cases challenge Trump’s policy relating to transgender people, and more than 20 cases against the president’s unilateral changes to federal funding, government recruitment and institutional structures such as the US International Development Agency and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

With Trump signing more than 75 executive orders since serving, unprecedented litigation floods have produced various results in blocking the president’s unilateral efforts to reshape the federal government. His efforts to freeze funding or rewrite old laws have generally been blocked, but some federal judges implicitly give him the green light to carry out part of his plans to reshape federal workers.

US John Couguhenour District Judge – nominated to the bench by Ronald Reagan – handed over Trump’s administration, one of his first legal defeats by blocking Trump’s executive commands on citizenship of the rights of the rights and offered one of the most fierce criticisms of his president’s initial actions.

“It becomes increasingly clear that for our president, the rule of law is only a barrier for the purpose of his policy,” said Judge Couguhenour. “There is a time -The time in the history of the world when people look back and ask, ‘where are the lawyers, where are the judges? At this time, the rule of law becomes very vulnerable. I refuse to let the flare become dark today.”

But other judges have quit policies that fully prevent them believe in probably violating the law, showing how the judiciary that moves more slowly can be defeated by fast moving administration. In a case that challenged Trump’s administrative efforts to dismiss thousands of probezers, US District Judge William Alsup reprimanded administrative actions but did not step on to stop the firing of indiscriminate employees, despite recognizing its sustainable loss.

“That is not true in our country – that we run our agency with such lies and tarnish someone’s records for the rest of their lives? Who will want to work in the government that will do that to them? Employees are the blood of our government life,” he said.

The number of lawsuits seems to have tested the limit of the court’s ability to hear emergency applications, especially in the District Court in DC, of ​​which 51 cases have been proposed. During a controversial session, US District Judge Ana Reyes threatened to impose sanctions on a lawyer who encouraged the court to receive emergency appeal while the court staff had “worked all the time on the sensitive time of the true time -monumental time,” Reyes said.

“Why don’t you know that with the defendant before coming and burdening me and burdening the defendants and burning my staff about this problem?” Reyes told Seth Waxman, a former US lawyer under President Bill Clinton who now represented eight former Inspector General who was fired by Trump.

The lawsuit that challenged Trump’s government had reached the Supreme Court twice, and the Department of Justice had begun their appeal to the Circuit Court in the Case of the Case.

While no judge found that the president openly opposed the court orders, Trump’s government had found himself in hot water because he failed to comply with several court orders, including orders to stop freezing funds unilaterally to the state and hold more than $ 1.9 billion of foreign assistance.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court narrowly rejected Trump’s administrative request to block the payment, marking the first time during this government that the Supreme Court decided on the president who nominated three of the nine court judges. In different opinions, judge Samuel Alito commented that he was “stunned” by the decision.

“Is a single district court judge who might not have a jurisdiction to have uncontrolled power to force the United States government to pay (and may lose forever) 2 billion taxpayers’ dollars? The answer to that question must be ‘no,’ but the majority of this court seems to think otherwise,” Alito said.

Alito’s criticism arose when Trump’s ally, including Vice President JD Vance and Elon Musk, had criticized the strength of the judiciary to slow down some administrative agendas. Vance openly suggested to oppose court orders, and Musk increasingly called for judges who blocked the government to be abused.

“The only way to restore the rules of the people in America is to impeach judges. Nothing is above the law, including judges, “Musk said in a new post on X.

While the first two months of Trump’s government has produced a burst of lawsuits, the cases themselves are expected to take months and have the potential for years to play because the court weighs the boundaries of Trump’s authority.