Dozens of Lawsuits Against the Trump Administration Filed by Government Employee Unions, Left-Wing Activists, and Democratic Politicians
(full series)
General Challenges to DOGE | Does Bureaucracy Equal Democracy?
Don’t Quit … but Don’t Do Your Job Either! | Say “Bye, Bye” to DEI
Don’t Quit … but Don’t Do Your Job Either!
In addition to opposing the departure of federal employees, voluntarily or otherwise, lawsuits against the Trump administration have also been filed to prevent the workers who remain from doing the jobs for which they were hired. The general target has been the enhanced border security that has been implemented since Trump’s inauguration.
Make the Road New York v. Huffman claims the administration’s “expedited removal” of those who enter nation unlawfully is itself a violation of several laws and constitutional provisions. As explained in another Capital Research Center report on DOGE, Make the Road New York has a complicated relationship with federal agencies and funding:
Make the Road New York (MRNY) and its partner, Make the Road States (also known as “Make the Road New Jersey”), have been approved for $2.6 million in combined grants since 2021 from HHS [Department of Health and Human Services] and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). MRNY has promoted the abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—a subsidiary of DHS. And in November 2024, Make the Road New Jersey sponsored a rally where “activists . . . vowed to fight President-elect Donald Trump.”
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security challenges immigration enforcement actions within houses of worship. Co-plaintiffs include four other regional Quaker congregations.
Organized Communities Against Deportations v. Donald Trump was filed by the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR) and other Chicago-area advocates seeking to defend the “sanctuary city” movement. In 2023, ICIRR reported total revenue of $80.4 million.
Another sanctuary city case is City and County of San Francisco v. Donald J. Trump.
Amica Center for Immigrant Rights v. U.S. Department of Justice seeks to reinstate federal funding for legal services used by migrants accused of being in the nation illegally.
On November 15, 2024, after Trump won, the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights and 192 other groups sent a letter to President Joe Biden, asking him to close detention centers used to hold illegal migrants and release everyone in them “before the next president follows through on his mass deportation plans.” Co-plaintiffs on Amica Center include six other signatories on the letter to Biden: American Gateways, the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project, Immigration Services and Legal Advocacy, the National Immigrant Justice Center, the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, and the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network.
Securing legal representation for illegal migrants sent by the Trump administration to the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station in Cuba is the basis for the complaint in Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center v Noem. Co-plaintiffs include the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, American Gateways, and Americans for Immigrant Justice.
Legal representation for the plaintiffs is being provided by the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and the International Refugee Assistance Project.
DHS counterargued that the detainees had access to legal representation. Then on February 20, DHS announced that all but one of the 178 migrant detainees at Guantanamo had been deported.
“Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion” was one of the executive orders signed by President Trump hours after he was sworn into office. The proclamation declares an emergency on the southern border and suspends all unauthorized entry until the president determines the “invasion” has ended.
Citing the allegedly illegal impact this will have on refugees seeking asylum from “persecution or torture,” Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem seeks to overturn the order. Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project are the co-plaintiffs with RAICES.
Cancellation of federal assistance for those refugees is being challenged in Pacito v. Trump. The plaintiffs include Church World Service and Lutheran Community Services Northwest.
Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship has been another controversial border security matter. As of this writing, a federal court has suspended the order, pending the outcome of legal challenges that allege the order is illegal and unconstitutional.
There have been at least six of these:
In the next installment, other lawsuits challenge efforts to eliminate DEI programs.
