Judical Losses Against the Trump Administration and Commentary

According to the Institute for Policy Integrity, Trump’s administration has failed 69% of the time when its agency actions have been challenged in court — typically for violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

A federal judge ordered Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to hand over documents and answer questions about the group's plans to trim federal agencies.

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan said in her order on Wednesday that Musk and DOGE have to comply with the discovery request in three weeks.

A number of recent losses have piled up for the Trump administration thus why Musk is calling for the impeachment of judges. The American College of Trial Lawyers (ACTL), acting through its Executive Committee, condemns the statement by Presidential Advisor Elon Musk, calling for “an immediate wave of judicial impeachments, not just one”against all judges, who issue orders blocking, even temporarily, the power of the Executive Branch to unilaterally overhaul the government. Earlier, he called for the impeachment of United States District Court Judge Paul A. Engelmayer in reaction to the Judge’s order temporarily restraining the Treasury Department from providing access to its payment system to anyone other than civil servants with a need for access to perform their duties. The College previously issued a statement denouncing that attack on Judge Engelmayer.

Recent losses include:

Birthright Citizenship: Trump’s Supreme Court request came after the Boston-based 1st Circuit Court of Appeals deniedthe Trump administration’s attempt to reinstate the executive order ending birthright citizenship on March 12, becoming the third federal appeals court that has ruled against the Trump administration on the issue. Four federal district judges blocked Trump's order rescinding birthright citizenship for children of non-citizens or non-permanent residents, with no judges so far ruling in Trump’s favor.

Some Federal Worker Firings: Judge William Alsup reversed the Trump administration’s mass firings of probationary employees in a ruling March 13, ordering the government to rehire terminated employees at the Departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Energy, Treasury and Agriculture because he ruled the directive ordering the employees’ firing was unlawful. Alsup’s ruling came after Beryl Howell ruled Trump’s firing of National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox was a “blatant violation” of federal law in an order March 6, after Judge Rudolph Contreras, an Obama appointee, issued a permanent injunction keeping Cathy Harris, who serves on the Merit Systems Protection Board that protects federal workers, in her role after Trump terminated her. The judge ruled Trump’s firing violated federal law requiring officials to only be removed for “malfeasance.”

Law Firm Access: Judge Beryl Howell on March 12 blocked aspects of an executive order that bars the federal government from doing business or sharing information with Perkins Coie, a high-profile law firm that previously represented Hillary Clinton, which the firm argued was unlawful retaliation for representing Trump’s political opponent and could lead to the firm going out of business.

DOGE Records: Judge Christopher Cooper ordered DOGE to comply with a watchdog’s request for documents under the Freedom of Information Act, ruling March 10 the Musk-led group must comply with requests for documents regarding its financials, structure and communications with other agencies.

Funding Freeze: Two federal judges blocked the Trump administration’s controversial directive to pause almost all federal grants, with Judge John McConnell doubling down on Feb. 10 and orderingthe government to resume funding after organizations that brought the case claimed the Trump administration had not released funds as required. McConnell then issued a more lasting order on March 6 that keeps the block in place while the litigation plays out.

National Institutes of Health Funding: On Feb. 10, Judge Angel Kelley blocked a change by the NIH to impose a blanket 15% reimbursement rate for some medical research costs—which have traditionally been negotiated on a case-by-case basis—after medical organizations and hospitals argued the change violated proper federal procedures. Kelley then extended that block March 5, meaning the Trump administration won’t be able to impose the 15% rate for the foreseeable future while the litigation plays out.

Probationary Worker Firings: Judge William Alsup ordered the Office of Personnel Management on Feb. 27 to temporarily reverse a memo urging agencies like the the Department of Defense to fire scores of relatively new “probationary” workers. Alsup reportedly said in a hearing OPM’s moves—part of a wider gambit to slash the size of the federal workforce—were likely illegal, arguing the office “does not have any authority whatsoever, under any statute in the history of the universe, to hire and fire employees at another agency.” The Trump administration argues OPM didn’t order mass firings, and instead just asked agencies to review probationary staff.

Refugee Admissions: Judge Jamal Whitehead blocked Trump’s executive order suspending refugee admissions following a hearing Feb. 25, in response to a lawsuit brought by refugee aid groups, with the judge ruling Trump’s order amounted to an “effective nullification of congressional will,” given the refugee program was established by Congress.

DOGE Access To Student Loan Data: A federal judge in Maryland blocked the Department of Government Efficiency’s access to data at the Office of Personnel Management and Department of Education Feb. 24—including student loan data—while a lawsuit from the American Federation of Teachers and federal employees moves forward, even after a different district court denied a coalition of University of California students’ request to block DOGE’s access to student loan data.

DOGE Access to Treasury Data: DOGE has been prohibited from accessing Treasury Department data while litigation moves forward, after Judge Jeanette Vargas blocked DOGE’s access to accessing Treasury data Feb. 21 in response to a lawsuit by Democratic attorneys general—coming after a different federal judge issued a more limited ruling grantingread-only access to two specific DOGE staffers. A different federal judge denied a separate effort to block DOGE’s work at the agency on March 7, but that ruling does not affect the other ruling blocking DOGE from Treasury data.

DEI: Responding to the Trump administration’s broad efforts to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, federal judges have blocked the government’s efforts to withhold any “equity-related” federal grants and dismiss civil servants who hold DEI-related jobs at federal intelligence agencies, at least while the litigation proceeds.

Transgender Rights: The Trump administration’s restrictions on transgender rights have so far been partially blocked in court, with multiple judges issuing rulings blocking the Trump administration from incarcerating transgender women inmates in male prisons, while other rulings have temporarily blocked the government’s restrictions on gender-affirming healthcare for minors. A federal judge ruled Feb. 28 the Trump administration cannot enforce restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors and federal funds being used “to promote gender ideology,” but only in the four states that brought the lawsuit (Colorado, Minnesota, Oregon and Washington).

Health Websites: Bates ordered the Trump administration to restore health-related government websites that it had taken offline following Trump’s inauguration, in a ruling on Feb. 11, after Doctors for America argued the information being removed violated federal law and the loss of information harmed its membership.

Commentary:

The United States Constitution guarantees everyone has the right to openly disagree with a decision of government officials and to challenge those decision. The conclusions, soundness or potential consequences of calls for impeachment due to losses is wrong. There are proper ways to challenge contested judicial orders, primarily through appeals. But for more than two centuries, judges have been vested with the clear right and duty to interpret the Constitution and statutory law and, when necessary, declare legislative and executive acts invalid or unconstitutional. Threats of impeachment for such judicial acts have no constitutional grounding and are patently inconsistent with the rule of law upon which our Nation was founded and are a show of dictorial leaning tendencies that that our founding fathers and the greatest generation that fought in WW2 would be appalled to witness. Moreover, such threats are dangerous because they undermine the public’s trust in the rule of law and may provoke violence against judges. If one does not trust the judicial process then one does not believe in the constitution or the founding values of the United States.