• frontpage-logo
  • NYI-homepage-mobile-logo

  • Donald Trump's new administration has touched off a frenzy of lawsuits. (Photo: Gage Skidmore.)

    Donald Trump’s new administration has touched off a frenzy of lawsuits. (Photo: Gage Skidmore.)

    Donald Trump’s second term is turning into government by lawsuit as legal challenges pile up over questionable, illegal, and “blatantly” unconstitutional executive orders.

    New York Attorney General Letitia James and a coalition of 22 other attorneys general are leading the latest legal assault on a Trump order.

    The measure, issued Jan. 27, would withhold trillions of dollars in funding “that every state in the country relies on to provide essential services to millions of Americans,” according to a statement.

    Separate lawsuits have been filed to block Trump’s assault on birthright citizenship and his executive order targeting transgender service members.

    Three lawsuits were filed against DOGE on Trump’s first day in office.  The suits charged violations of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972. It sets transparency rules for federal commissions.

    The president has also been sued over an order that would strip tens of thousands of federal employees of civil service protections, setting them up to be fired and replaced by political loyalists.

    Quaker congregations are suing the Trump administration over an order to allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to conduct raids in schools, hospitals, and houses of worship.

    Steve Bannon’s New York Wall-Scam Criminal Trial Will Overshadow New Trump Term

    “The very threat of that [immigration] enforcement deters congregants from attending services, especially members of immigrant communities,” the lawsuit states,

    James and the attorneys general coalition are seeking a court order to immediately stop the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) from carrying out the policy and preserve the majority of federal assistance to states.

    “Immediately blocking the majority of federal funds to states is unconstitutional and dangerous,” said James in the statement

    “Millions of Americans rely on federally funded programs every day to get the health care they need, support their families, and stay safe in their communities.

    “The policy would immediately jeopardize state programs that provide critical health and childcare services to families in need, deliver support to public schools, combat hate crimes and violence against women, provide life-saving disaster relief to states, and more,” according to the group.

    The OMB policy would halt essential disaster relief funds to places like California and North Carolina, where tens of thousands of residents are waiting for FEMA grants to rebuild after devastating wildfires and floods.

    The Emperor Has No Clothes: Why Trump’s Agenda Will Be DOA in Congress

    In New York alone, the state’s Department of Health is set to receive about $40 billion in federal funding in fiscal year 2025.  Hundreds of millions of dollars are dedicated to providing health care in rural and underserved areas of the state.

    Already, this policy has unleashed chaos and uncertainty, with law enforcement halting drug enforcement efforts, Medicaid portals shutting down, and other critical services being thrown into disarray,” James said.

    The National Council of Nonprofits, the American Public Health Association, the Main Street Alliance, and SAGE filed a similar lawsuit against OMB in Washington, D.C., federal court. Acting OMB director Matthew Vaeth was also named as a defendant.

    A federal judge on Tuesday (Jan. 28) temporarily blocked  Trump’s federal funding pause, designed to uproot progressive initiatives that don’t jive with MAGA’s ideological litmus test.

    U.S. District Judge Loren L. AliKhan ruled minutes before the funding freeze was scheduled to go into effect this afternoon.

    Trump’s ‘Tech-Bro’ Scheme to Boost Crypto, Sink the Dollar, End Democracy and Get Fantastically Rich

    Legal observers say the clash is likely to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court in a test of presidential power.

    The coalition argues that OMB’s policy violates the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act by imposing a government-wide stop to spending without any regard for the laws and regulations that govern each source of federal funding.

    The president cannot decide unilaterally to override laws governing federal spending, and OMB’s policy unconstitutionally overrides Congress’s power to decide how federal funds are spent.

    Trump lawyers said programs providing direct assistance to citizens would not be affected, such as Medicare, Social Security, student loans, and food stamps. But that was not immediately evident by the thinly worded order.

    In a separate legal matter, a federal judge Thursday (Jan. 23) ruled that Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship was “blatantly unconstitutional.”

    Trump Mass Deportation Shaping Up to Be First Administration Fiasco

    Judge John Coughenour, a 30-year veteran on the bench appointed by President Ronald Reagan granted an injunction sought by Washington state Attorney General Nick Brown and attorneys general from three other Democratic-led states.

    The temporary restraining order will block the policy’s implementation for 14 days while the matter is challenged in court.

    “I have been on the bench for over four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear,” Coughenour said.

    At issue is the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to all children born on US soil.

    Washington state attorney Lane Polozola said the Trump administration ignored harm caused by the order. Moreover, harm “appears to be the purpose” of the executive order.

    Other lawsuits targeting the controversial order have been filed in separate jurisdictions. Other hearings to halt the order are set for Feb. 5 in Maryland and Feb. 10 in New Hampshire,  according to reports.

    “Birthright citizenship is guaranteed in our Constitution and is absolutely central to what America stands for,” said Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project and lead attorney in the New Hampshire case.

    Attorney General James and the attorneys general of California, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island are leading the lawsuit.  Joining the lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.