Major Political Lawsuits Against the Trump Administration

Since President Trump’s second inauguration on January 20, 2025, courts have handled more than 750 lawsuits challenging his administration’s policies, and independent trackers put the number as high as 803.¹² The major lawsuits against the Trump administration cover tariffs, immigration enforcement, the firing of independent agency heads, the shutdown of federal agencies by the Department of Government Efficiency, frozen federal grants, executive orders targeting specific law firms, and a March 2026 order rewriting how states run elections. The administration’s record in court has been poor: of 172 cases decided on the merits, plaintiffs have won 67 and the government has won 7, with another 96 dismissed on procedural grounds. Democracy Forward, one of the most active plaintiffs’ organizations, reported losing rates above 70 percent even before Republican- and Trump-appointed judges.³

The Tariff Case: The Biggest Defeat So Far

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. Chief Justice Roberts wrote for a majority that also included Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson, holding that tariffs fall under Congress’s constitutional taxing power and that no president in IEEPA’s half-century of existence had ever used the statute to levy duties.⁴ The Court applied the major-questions doctrine, concluding that Congress does not delegate a power that consequential through ambiguous language.⁵

The decision invalidated the “Liberation Day” reciprocal tariffs and other IEEPA-based duties, leaving intact tariffs imposed under other statutes such as Section 232 for steel and aluminum. More than $160 billion in collected tariff revenue is now subject to refund proceedings at the Court of International Trade, where importers began filing claims in April 2026. Consumer class actions have followed against retailers and shipping companies, with plaintiffs arguing they are owed a pass-through of refunds because the tariff costs were built into prices they paid.⁶

On the same day as the ruling, Trump issued Proclamation No. 11012 imposing new tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The Court of International Trade struck that order down on May 7, 2026.⁶

Immigration Litigation

Immigration policy has generated more lawsuits than any other subject area, and several cases have reached the Supreme Court.

Birthright Citizenship

Trump signed an executive order on Inauguration Day denying citizenship to U.S.-born children if both parents lack permanent legal status. Three federal judges issued nationwide injunctions within weeks, and the order has never taken effect.⁷ In June 2025, the Supreme Court’s Trump v. CASA decision limited “universal” injunctions but left the underlying constitutional question untouched. A federal judge in New Hampshire responded by certifying a nationwide class and issuing a class-based injunction on July 10, 2025, in Barbara v. Donald J. Trump. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the follow-up case, Trump v. Barbara, with oral arguments set for April 1, 2026.⁸

Alien Enemies Act Deportations and Abrego Garcia

The administration’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan nationals without standard immigration proceedings produced the sharpest confrontation between the executive branch and the judiciary. In March 2025, Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order to halt deportation flights, but flights to El Salvador continued while he was still holding emergency proceedings. In April 2025 Boasberg found probable cause that the administration was in criminal contempt.⁹ The D.C. Circuit blocked the contempt case in April 2026 in a 2-1 decision, with both Trump appointees in the majority finding the original order too vague to support contempt.¹⁰

One deportee produced his own high-profile case. Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran man who had been granted legal protection from removal by a U.S. immigration judge in 2019, was deported on March 15, 2025 in what the government acknowledged was an administrative error. He remains detained in El Salvador’s CECOT prison. The Supreme Court ruled in April 2025 that the government must facilitate his return, but district Judge Paula Xinis reported that no apparent effort had been made, with the administration invoking state secrets and diplomatic concerns to withhold information.¹¹¹²

Temporary Protected Status and Asylum

Federal judges in Washington, D.C. and New York blocked the administration’s terminations of Temporary Protected Status for Haitian and Syrian nationals. The Supreme Court heard the consolidated case, Mullin v. Doe, on April 29, 2026. Haitian challengers argued the termination was a “preordained result” driven by racial animus; the government argued the TPS statute bars judicial review altogether. A ruling is expected by late June or early July 2026.¹³ The Court also heard Mullin v. Al Otro Lado in March 2026, on whether asylum seekers turned away at the Mexican side of the border have legally “arrived” and are entitled to an inspection; that case also remains undecided.¹⁴

Firing Independent Agency Heads

Two Supreme Court cases test whether the president can fire the leaders of independent federal agencies at will.

The FTC: Trump v. Slaughter

Trump removed Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, stating her service was “inconsistent with this Administration’s priorities.” A district judge declared the firing unlawful and ordered her reinstatement.¹⁵ The D.C. Circuit refused to stay that order, citing the 1935 Humphrey’s Executor ruling that FTC commissioners can only be removed for cause, and noting the Supreme Court has “expressly refused five times to reconsider” that precedent.¹⁶ The Supreme Court granted certiorari on September 22, 2025 and heard argument in December.

The Federal Reserve: Trump v. Cook

The administration also attempted to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, a move without precedent in the Fed’s 112-year history. Lower courts kept Cook in her seat while the case proceeded. At oral argument on January 21, 2026, all nine justices sounded skeptical of the government’s claim of unreviewable removal power, and Justice Kavanaugh warned that the administration’s position would “weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve.”¹⁷ A decision is expected by summer 2026.¹⁸

DOGE, USAID, and the CFPB

The Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, has generated dozens of lawsuits over its access to sensitive government data, its authority to restructure agencies, and its role in mass firings. A coalition of 19 Democratic attorneys general sued to block DOGE’s access to Treasury Department records, and a separate 14-state coalition challenged Musk’s authority directly.¹⁹

DOGE’s move to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development produced the sharpest rebuke. In March 2025, Judge Theodore Chuang ruled that Musk and DOGE had “likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways” by dismantling an agency Congress created. He ordered employee access restored and barred further steps to close USAID.²⁰ By August 2025 the court had certified a class of USAID workers and contractors, though an appeals court stayed enforcement while the case continues.²¹

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau faced a parallel shutdown effort. Acting Director Russell Vought halted work at the agency in early 2025 and requested $0 in Federal Reserve funding. The National Treasury Employees Union won a preliminary injunction requiring reinstatement of terminated employees and continued operation of the consumer complaint system. When the administration argued the CFPB could not legally be funded because the Federal Reserve was operating at a loss, Judge Amy Berman Jackson rejected that theory in December 2025, warning the alternative would be “tantamount to closing what is left of the Bureau.”²² Vought stated in a court filing that the agency expected to exhaust its funds in early 2026.²³

The Federal Funding Freeze

On January 27, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget directed a freeze on all federal grant and loan disbursements pending review for compliance with Trump’s executive orders on immigration, DEI, and abortion. The freeze covered up to $3 trillion across roughly 2,600 programs.²⁴

Two lawsuits landed within hours. A coalition of nonprofits won a temporary restraining order from Judge Loren AliKhan in D.C., and 22 states plus the District of Columbia obtained a second from Judge Jack McConnell in Rhode Island. OMB rescinded the memo, but the White House press secretary posted on social media that the freeze was still in effect, and both judges cited that post in refusing to dismiss the cases as moot.²⁴ More multistate suits followed throughout 2025, challenging conditions attached to transportation, health, environmental, and education money.¹⁹

Executive Orders Against Law Firms

The administration issued executive orders against specific law firms — Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey — revoking security clearances, terminating government contracts, and restricting building access. The orders were framed as responses to each firm’s past representation of clients disfavored by the president.²⁵

All four firms sued and all four won. Federal judges in D.C. declared the orders unconstitutional under the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments. Judge Beryl Howell granted summary judgment against the Perkins Coie order in May 2025, and Judge John Bates declared the Jenner & Block order “null and void” weeks later. The D.C. Circuit consolidated the government’s appeals in February 2026, with oral argument set for May 14, 2026.²

Over 800 law firms signed amicus briefs opposing the orders, but many others quietly reached agreements with the administration to avoid becoming targets, committing to conditions that included $500 million in pro bono work for causes the president favors.²⁶ In June 2025 the American Bar Association filed a broader suit challenging what it called the “Law Firm Intimidation Policy,” alleging a chilling effect on firms considering cases against the federal government.²⁷

The March 2026 Elections Executive Order

On March 31, 2026, Trump signed Executive Order No. 14399, directing the U.S. Postal Service to transmit mail ballots only to voters on a federal list and threatening state election officials with criminal prosecution and loss of federal funding for noncompliance. A coalition of 23 attorneys general and Pennsylvania’s governor sued days later in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, arguing the order violates the Constitution’s grant of election-administration authority to the states and imposes changes Congress never authorized.²⁸ The coalition also warned the order would disenfranchise eligible voters by relying on flawed federal databases.²⁹ The states moved for summary judgment on April 27, 2026, with a hearing set for June 2. As of mid-June, no injunction had issued.³⁰

Prosecutions of Political Adversaries

The Justice Department has brought criminal cases against several figures widely understood as adversaries of the administration. Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted in the Eastern District of Virginia, and New York Attorney General Letitia James was charged in October 2025 with bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution.³¹ A federal judge later dismissed both indictments, finding that the interim U.S. attorney who brought them, Lindsey Halligan, had been appointed in violation of federal law limiting interim prosecutor tenures.³²

Former National Security Adviser John Bolton was indicted in October 2025 on charges of retaining and transmitting classified information. In June 2026, reports indicated Bolton had agreed to plead guilty to a single count for a $2.25 million fine and a prison sentence capped at five years, with the possibility of avoiding incarceration entirely. Re-arraignment was set for June 26, 2026.³³ A Protect Democracy Project amicus brief filed in October 2025 grouped these cases with the indictment of a congresswoman for allegedly interfering with ICE officers, the arrest of Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, and criminal investigations into Senator Adam Schiff and Governor Lisa Cook, describing a pattern the organization called retaliatory and vindictive prosecution.³¹

Suits the Administration Filed Against States

Not all the major cases have the administration on defense. The Lawfare tracker counts 22 suits filed by the Trump administration against state and local laws, primarily “sanctuary” policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.³⁴ Courts dismissed the government’s challenges to sanctuary laws in Colorado, New York, and Illinois, generally holding that cooperation with federal immigration enforcement is voluntary for states and localities. A suit against California produced a split result, striking down one state law but upholding another. Suits against Boston, Los Angeles, Newark, New Jersey, and Connecticut are pending.³⁵

What’s Still Coming

The Supreme Court has already taken action in at least 31 cases involving the administration, with 6 more pending as of June 2026.¹ Decisions in the birthright citizenship, TPS, asylum, and Federal Reserve firing cases are expected before the term ends. The pending elections order hearing, the D.C. Circuit’s consolidated law-firm appeal, and the ongoing tariff-refund proceedings will all be decided in the second half of 2026. And 107 executive actions remain in active litigation without a final ruling, meaning the case count will continue to climb.¹⁹

1
The New York Times. Trump Administration Lawsuits Tracker
2
Just Security. Tracker: Litigation and Legal Challenges to the Trump Administration
3
Democracy Forward. On Anniversary of Trump’s Second Inauguration, Democracy Forward Marks Record Litigation Wins
4
Supreme Court of the United States. Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump
5
Tax Foundation. Supreme Court Trump Tariffs Ruling
6
International Trade Insights. IEEPA Tariffs: What Importers Need to Know About Refunds and Consumer Class Actions
7
SCOTUSblog. Where Does the Birthright Citizenship Order Currently Stand
8
ACLU. Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Executive Order: What Happens Next
9
NPR. Judge Rules Probable Cause for Contempt in Alien Enemies Act Case
10
Al Jazeera. US Appeals Court Blocks Contempt Case Over Trump Deportation Flights
11
The Washington Post. Kilmar Abrego Garcia Case: Deportation to El Salvador
12
Supreme Court of the United States. Noem v. Abrego Garcia
13
SCOTUSblog. Court Considers Whether Trump Administration Properly Ended Temporary Protected Status for Haiti
14
SCOTUSblog. Noem v. Al Otro Lado
15
Oyez. Trump v. Slaughter
16
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Slaughter v. Trump, No. 25-5261
17
NPR. Supreme Court Hears Federal Reserve Lisa Cook Case
18
The New York Times. Four Takeaways From the Supreme Court Fed Hearing
19
Associated Press. Trump Executive Order Lawsuit Tracker
20
Forbes. DOGE Loses in Court: Elon Musk’s USAID Shutdown Is Likely Unconstitutional, Judge Rules
21
GovExec. Judge Certifies Class in Lawsuit on Behalf of Ex-USAID Workers and Contractors
22
NPR. CFPB Funding Court Order
23
Politico. Trump Administration Declares CFPB Funding Illegal
24
Democracy Docket. Nonprofits Sue Trump Administration Over Federal Grants Freeze
25
Knight First Amendment Institute. Law Firms v. Trump Administration
26
International Bar Association. US Presidency: Law Firms Face Targeted Executive Orders That Undermine Independence of Profession
27
American Bar Association. ABA Files Suit to Halt Government Intimidation
28
Massachusetts Attorney General. AG Campbell Sues Trump Administration Over Unlawful Executive Order
29
California Attorney General. Attorney General Bonta Co-Leads Lawsuit Challenging President Trump’s Executive Order
30
Michigan Attorney General. AG Nessel Moves to Permanently Block Election Executive Order
31
Levin Center. Protect Democracy Project Amicus Brief
32
The Daily Record. Trump Ally Comey Indictment Dismissed
33
WBAL-TV. Ex-National Security Adviser John Bolton Will Plead Guilty
34
Lawfare. Tracking Trump Administration Litigation
35
Immigrant Legal Resource Center. Federal Litigation Tracker