Federal judges issued multiple rulings Thursday targeting President Donald Trump’s order rescinding birthright citizenship and billionaire Elon Musk’s efforts to trim the federal workforce, the latest in a slew of legal actions as Democrats and others fight Musk and Trump in court.
President Donald Trump talks to reporters in the Oval Office at the White House on January 30.
Getty Images
Key Takeaways
- Feb. 6A labor union and the American Foreign Service Association sued Trump for trying to shutter the U.S. Agency for International Development by slashing staff and halting aid, arguing it’s unconstitutional for the president to eliminate a federal agency approved by Congress—and alleging his moves “generated a global humanitarian crisis.”
- Feb. 6Boston-based Judge George O’Toole paused a Thursday deadline for over 2 million federal employees to accept a buyout offer—part of Trump and Musk’s cost-cutting push—as he considers whether to grant a request by federal workers’ unions who sued to block the buyouts, extending the deadline until Monday.
- Feb. 6Judge John Coughenour in Seattle extended his pause on Trump’s day-one executive order rescinding birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented or temporary immigrants, in response to a lawsuit brought by Democratic-led states, writing, “The president cannot change, limit, or qualify this Constitutional right via an executive order.”
- Feb. 6D.C.-based Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said only two Musk-affiliated staffers can access the Treasury Department’s payment system on a “read only” basis, after workers’ unions sued the Treasury amid reports Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency accessed sensitive records. (One of the employees given access has reportedly since resigned over racist tweets.)
- Feb. 5 A second judge —Deborah L. Boardman of Maryland—blocked Trump’s policy rescinding birthright citizenship, in response to a lawsuit brought by nonprofits representing undocumented pregnant women.
- Feb. 4Judge Royce C. Lamberth in D.C. paused Trump’s restrictions on transgender women being incarcerated in women’s prisons and federal prisons providing gender-affirming medical treatment, after multiple inmates sued to block the policy.
- Feb. 3District Judge Loren L. Alikhan broadly blocked the Trump administration’s memo halting almost all federal assistance—even after the White House claimed it had been rescinded—while litigation brought by nonprofit groups that receive government funds moves forward.
- Jan. 31The Trump administration’s memo pausing most federal assistance was partially blocked, as Judge John J. McConnell Jr. ruled the Trump administration cannot withhold funding from the Democratic-led states that sued to block the funding freeze.
- Jan. 26O’Toole prohibited law enforcement from transferring an incarcerated transgender woman to a male prison facility—at least while litigation filed by the inmate moves forward—after Trump stripped transgender Americans of their legal protections, including being incarcerated at prisons aligned with their gender identities.
- Jan. 23Coughenour paused Trump’s order rescinding birthright citizenship, the first major ruling against the second Trump administration.
- Jan. 20The first lawsuit against Trump’s administration was filed minutes after he was sworn into office, as public interest law group National Security Counselors argued DOGE should be classified as a federal advisory board that has “fairly balanced” membership and follows public transparency rules.
Who Else Is Suing Trump?
Lawsuits have been filed against a number of other Trump administration directives in cases that haven’t resulted in any rulings yet, including pending cases on Trump’s immigration policies like asylum restrictions, raids on sanctuary cities, immigration officers entering houses of worship, and restricting grants to immigration-related groups. Multiple other transgender rights-focused cases are pending, including litigation against Trump’s transgender military ban and minors receiving gender-affirming care, as well as a lawsuit challenging Trump’s broader restrictions on diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Other lawsuits that are still pending include litigation against the Justice Department targeting agents who worked on Jan. 6-related cases, Trump’s “Schedule F” that makes it easier to fire career civil servants, Trump’s firing of National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne A. Wilcox, the Office of Personnel Management allegedly storing emails on an unsecured server and the government removing health data from federal websites.
Who Else Is Suing Over Elon Musk And Doge?
Multiple lawsuits are also arguing Trump should not have been able to create Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency” by renaming the U.S. Digital Service, while another challenge takes aim at DOGE accessing records at the Department of Labor.
Will The Supreme Court Side With Trump?
None of the lawsuits against the second Trump administration have yet made it to the Supreme Court, though at least some inevitably will. The high stakes of the lawsuits brought against Trump policies, plus the fact that bringing multiple lawsuits against a single policy may result in conflicting rulings, makes it all but certain the high court will eventually weigh in on some of the legal challenges that are now making their way through the courts.
It’s unclear how the 6-3 conservative court, stacked with three Trump appointees, will ultimately rule on any challenges, though legal experts have suggested some of the administration’s moves may be too much for even the conservative-leaning court to get behind. Georgetown Law School professor Stephen Vladeck wrote he was skeptical the Supreme Court would back the administration’s memo halting federal funding, for instance.
He noted that while the court was willing to give Trump more power in its recent decision giving him some immunity from criminal charges, it would be “quite another” thing for them to give him “the right to refuse to spend any and all money Congress appropriates.” Legal experts have also been highly skeptical of the legal justification the Trump administration has used to justify the order nullifying birthright citizenship, which claims the 14th Amendment—which guarantees citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”—has always exempted the children of undocumented immigrants or noncitizens.
Mark Krikorian, who runs the Center for Immigration Studies and supports ending birthright citizenship, acknowledged to NBC News in July Trump’s argument is “something that the Supreme Court may well decide against,” and legal experts have previously decried the legal theory behind Trump’s order as a “lunatic fringe argument,” with University of Massachusetts, Amherst, professor Rebecca Hamlin telling NPR in 2018 that any lawyer who believes it is “like a unicorn.”
What Controversial Actions By Trump And Elon Musk Haven’t Yet Resulted In Lawsuits?
Trump has already issued a number of major executive actions, and many have not yet been challenged in court, such as him pulling out of the World Health Organization, withholding federal funding from schools that allow transgender women in women’s sports, imposing tariffs on China, removing safeguards around artificial intelligence, and rescinding Biden-era climate change initiatives, including ordering federal agencies not to disburse some funding that was approved by Congress. Musk and DOGE have also undertaken a number of controversial moves that haven’t yet resulted in court action, including DOGE staffers accessing information for Medicare and Medicaid and reportedly using artificial intelligence to search through sensitive internal data for the Department of Education.
Key Background
Trump has issued a slew of executive orders in the less than three weeks he’s been in the White House, issuing broad orders on issues such as climate change, transgender rights, DEI initiatives, education, immigration, the U.S. military, abortion, the federal death penalty and more. Musk, whom Trump appointed to lead DOGE and has become one of his top advisers, has also drawn widespread controversy as DOGE has burrowed into the federal government and gained access to government information while proposing widespread cuts to spending.
With Republicans holding both the White House and control of Congress, the courts have become the primary way for Democrats to issue any sort of check on the Trump administration’s actions, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., has pointed to litigation as a key pillar of Democrats’ response to the second Trump presidency.
“We’ve seen a flood and an avalanche of outrageous executive actions that have been taken by the administration and by the current president, but that has also prompted a response of righteous litigation,” Jeffries told MSNBC when asked how Democrats would oppose Trump’s policies, saying the litigation strategy “will continue as we move forward.”
Look back on the week that was with hand-picked articles from Australia and around the world. Sign up to the Forbes Australia newsletter here or become a member here.
