Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
The Trump administration was dealt a rapid succession of legal defeats this week, with federal judges across the country halting multiple executive orders related to immigration enforcement, election integrity, and crackdowns on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in education.
The administration is currently facing over 170 lawsuits tied to President Trump’s sweeping executive actions. While some rulings were temporary, others struck at the heart of legal theories the administration has used to justify its aggressive policy shifts. Government attorneys have already filed appeals or are preparing emergency petitions to the U.S. Supreme Court.
DEI Crackdown Halted
A federal judge in New Hampshire blocked enforcement of an Education Department order requiring states to abandon “illegal DEI practices.” Judges in Maryland and Washington, D.C. also temporarily stopped key parts of the department’s initiative, undermining a Friday deadline for states to comply.
Election Reforms Partially Blocked
In Washington, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly blocked parts of Trump’s election overhaul, ruling that the proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal voter registration oversteps executive authority. The judge upheld provisions tightening mail ballot deadlines, but noted election rules are the domain of Congress and state legislatures, not the president.
Immigration Orders Face Multiple Setbacks
-
In Colorado, Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney barred the use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelan migrants, including alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang.
-
In Maryland, the administration was ordered to facilitate the return of a man deported despite an active asylum case, violating a 2019 settlement.
-
Court documents revealed ICE is giving detainees as little as 12 hours to contest deportation under the Alien Enemies Act, potentially violating a prior Supreme Court ruling.
-
A judge in San Francisco blocked the administration from withholding federal funds from sanctuary cities, ruling the policy unconstitutional, echoing a similar ruling from 2017.
Transgender Military Ban Stalls
In a separate battle, the administration asked the Supreme Court to allow enforcement of its ban on transgender military service, while lower courts continue to hear challenges. A federal judge in Tacoma, Washington, previously ruled the policy discriminatory, siding with transgender veterans and active-duty members who called the ban unjust and stigmatizing.
What’s Next?
Despite the setbacks, the Trump administration is appealing many of these decisions, with several cases expected to reach the federal appellate courts and potentially the U.S. Supreme Court. The DOJ maintains that the executive orders are within the president’s constitutional authority, while plaintiffs argue the orders violate civil rights and constitutional protections.
As legal challenges continue to mount, the final outcome of these sweeping policy changes remains uncertain.
