So far, at least nine (now ~40) (now ~160) judges, including Trump appointees, have called a halt to Trump executive actions

[essentialsaltes]

The steps didn't happen. The proper procedure didn't happen.

This is just a preliminary injunction. There's plenty of time to send little postcards to every womb in America.

 

[rjs330]

Another win for Trump. The Supreme Court over rules a lesser court AGAIN.

These courts are overstepping their authority and continue to do so. Even now we are seeing lower courts failing to follow Supreme Court rulings. Trying to go around their rulings.

Well here's another win.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/08/supreme-court-federal-worker-firings-ruling-00442721

 

[RocksInMyHead]

The steps didn't happen. The proper procedure didn't happen.

Which ones didn't happen?

The ACLU filed a complaint in court on behalf of a larger group, which met all of the requirements and included the motion for class certification.

The defendant (the US government, representing Donald J Trump) was granted a chance to oppose the motion in a hearing. At that hearing, the judge granted certification of the class and issued a temporary injunction halting enforcement of the executive order against that certified class.

The members of the class do not need to be notified, nor does the case need to go to trial in order for a judge to issue a temporary injunction. Temporary injunctions are just that - temporary. They stop one party in the case from doing something potentially illegal until the case can be heard in order to prevent serious or irreparable harm from coming to the other party. I think that we can all agree that preventing someone from obtaining US citizenship who is legally entitled to it would constitute "serious or irreparable harm". Since the purpose of the case is to determine whether this class of persons is entitled to citizenship, your opinion on whether or not they are citizens is irrelevant.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Judge restricts some immigration raids in California​

The temporary restraining order blocks the Department of Homeland Security from making arrests of people based solely on factors like race, accent, the type of work they do and their presence at a particular location -- such as day laborer pick up sites and agricultural sites.

The order comes after a lawsuit filed by immigrant advocacy groups accused federal agents of targeting Latino communities with unconstitutional tactics — including warrantless arrests, racial profiling and denying access to legal counsel.

"What the federal government would have this Court believe —in the face of a mountain of evidence presented in this case—is that none of this is actually happening," [judge] Frimpong wrote.

see also

Federal judge signals a halt to indiscriminate immigration stops​

The ruling was not made public, but a final order is expected Friday on the case that has become a centerpiece in the battle over Trump’s mass deportation plan. The lawsuit filed by immigrant rights groups last week seeks to block federal agents from stopping and arresting brown-skinned people without probable cause and then placing them in “dungeon-like” conditions without access to lawyers.

[The judge] pressed [gov lawyer] Skedzielewski on how agents were making arrests, after he argued that “these are sophisticated operations” and seemed to say that arrests stemmed from particular people who were being targeted.

“There doesn’t seem to be anything like that here, which makes it difficult for the court to accept your description of what is happening, because there is no proof that that is what is happening as opposed to what the plaintiffs are saying is happening,” Frimpong said.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Washington Post:
link2

President Donald Trump and his appointees have been accused of flouting courts in a third of the more than 160 lawsuits against the administration in which a judge has issued a substantive ruling, a Washington Post analysis has found, suggesting widespread noncompliance withAmerica’s legal system.
Plaintiffs say Justice Department lawyers and the agencies they represent are snubbing rulings, providing false information, failing to turn over evidence, quietly working around court orders and inventing pretexts to carry out actions that have been blocked.
Judges appointed by presidents of both parties have often agreed. None have taken punitive action to try to force compliance, however, allowing the administration’s defiance of orders to go on for weeks or even months in some instances.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Federal judge issues new nationwide block against Trump’s order seeking to end birthright citizenship​

Appeals Court rules against Trump admin's birthright citizenship EO​

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, upheld a lower court ruling that President Donald Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship is very likely unconstitutional on its face and that a nationwide injunction precluding enforcement is the only way to provide complete relief to the state plaintiffs, pending litigation.

A federal judge in a separate case [above, I assume] has already enjoined nationwide enforcement of the order against a certified class of individuals affected by the presidential action -- all newborns in the U.S. to noncitizens.

 

[JSRG]

Appeals Court rules against Trump admin's birthright citizenship EO​

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, upheld a lower court ruling that President Donald Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship is very likely unconstitutional on its face and that a nationwide injunction precluding enforcement is the only way to provide complete relief to the state plaintiffs, pending litigation.

A federal judge in a separate case [above, I assume] has already enjoined nationwide enforcement of the order against a certified class of individuals affected by the presidential action -- all newborns in the U.S. to noncitizens.

Yet another article about a decision... that doesn't bother to link to the decision, or even give the name of the case.

It's very frustrating so many articles do this. Why is this so hard? The good news is, these ones did:

Ninth Circuit Upholds Nationwide Injunction in State Suit Against Birthright Citizenship Order

A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has affirmed a district court's nationwide injunction…

reason.com

9th Circuit rules Trump’s birthright citizenship order unconstitutional

A federal appeals court on Wednesday agreed with a Seattle judge’s decision to universally block President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. The appeals judges ruled 2-1 that Trump’s order, issued on Inauguration Day, violates the 14th Amendment to the U.S...

www.yahoo.com

It's Washington v. Trump and the decision can be seen at https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/07/23/25-807.pdf or https://storage.courtlistener.com/r...b7bc70c-6fcb-460e-9232-c6bc8ad16303.163.1.pdf.

I was curious about what the dissent was about, and looking into it, it looks like it was just a disagreement on the issue of standing; it indeed concludes with "Because we don’t have jurisdiction to review State Plaintiffs’ claims at this time, I do not address their merits or the scope of the district court’s injunction." Glancing over it, its argument on standing seems plausible, but at any rate the dissent was on procedural grounds that, while relevant to this case if the dissent is correct, wouldn't settle all of the other cases on this subject.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Trump-backed judge rules administration’s withholding of funds illegal​

The lawsuit by the National Endowment for Democracy is just one among dozens against the administration for frozen or withheld money previously approved by Congress.

..

Trump administration must restore hundreds of UCLA research grants, federal judge rules​

In her evening order, issued hours after a San Francisco court hearing, U.S. District Judge Rita F. Lin said the government’s slashing of UCLA funds violated her June ruling blocking science research grant terminations.

She ordered the Trump administration to file an update by Aug. 19 detailing whether it had restored the grants and, if not, “an explanation [for why they aren't obeying]"

 

[essentialsaltes]

Judge says he's skeptical of a Trump lawsuit against every federal judge in Maryland​

At issue is a standing order issued by Chief Judge George Russell on May 21 and updated a week later that set rules for handling cases involving immigrants facing immediate risk of deportation. The order applies a temporary stay of deportation for two business days while the case is considered.

There are other avenues the government has to challenge the order, [the judge] said, including by appealing in a case involving an individual immigrant in which the standing order is applied.

Cullen did, however, appear more sympathetic to some of the government's arguments on the merits, noting that government lawyers made a "fair point" that even a two-day delay acts as a form of temporary injunction.

A former prosecutor, Cullen was appointed by Trump in 2020 with the backing of Virginia’s two Democratic senators. He said he plans to issue a ruling by Labor Day. [A Virginia judge is involved because hey Trump is suing all the Maryland ones]

[Judges' lawyer] Clement warned in court that if the lawsuit was allowed to move forward toward a trial, it would create a "nightmare scenario" in which judges could be deposed and internal judiciary documents could be reviewed by the government.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Judge restricts some immigration raids in California​

The temporary restraining order blocks the Department of Homeland Security from making arrests of people based solely on factors like race, accent, the type of work they do and their presence at a particular location

The Supreme Court could give immigration agents broad power to stop and question Latinos​

This year’s most far-reaching immigration case is likely to decide if immigration agents in Los Angeles are free to stop, question and arrest Latinos they suspect are here illegally.

The Greater Los Angeles area is “ground zero for the effects of the border crisis,” his lawyers told the Supreme Court this month

Their fast-track appeal urged the justices to confirm that immigration agents have “reasonable suspicion” to stop and question Latinos who work in businesses or occupations that draw many undocumented workers.

“Reasonable suspicion is a low bar — well below probable cause,” administration lawyers said. “Apparent ethnicity can be a factor supporting reasonable suspicion,” they added, noting that this standard assumes “lawful stops of innocent people may occur.”

In their response to the appeal, immigrant rights advocates said the court should not “bless a regime that could ensnare in an immigration dragnet the millions of people ... who are U.S. citizens or otherwise legally entitled to be in this country and are Latino, speak Spanish” and work in construction, food services or agriculture and can be seen at bus stops, car washes or retail parking lots.

[The lower court ruling] said agents may not stop persons based “solely” on four factors: their race or apparent ethnicity, the fact they speak Spanish, the type of work they do, or their location such as a day labor pickup site or a car wash. [9th circuit left her order in place.]

 

[eclipsenow]

Does anyone estimate when there might be a big confrontation between Trump and the Courts?​

What issue, and what triggers?​

Not asking for a crystal ball - just best guesses.

 

[A2SG]

Does anyone estimate when there might be a big confrontation between Trump and the Courts?​

What issue, and what triggers?​

Not asking for a crystal ball - just best guesses.

Won't happen. SCOTUS and it's conservative majority have his back.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5420857-trump-winning-streak-supreme-court/

https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/25/politics/supreme-court-justices-trump-lower-court

-- A2SG, thanks, Federalist Society....

 

[essentialsaltes]

Judge says he's skeptical of a Trump lawsuit against every federal judge in Maryland​

At issue is a standing order issued by Chief Judge George Russell on May 21 and updated a week later that set rules for handling cases involving immigrants facing immediate risk of deportation.

[Judges' lawyer] Clement warned in court that if the lawsuit was allowed to move forward toward a trial, it would create a "nightmare scenario" in which judges could be deposed and internal judiciary documents could be reviewed by the government.

Judge stayed skeptical.

Federal judge tosses Trump administration’s lawsuit against Maryland’s entire federal bench​

U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen granted a request by the judges to toss the case, saying to do otherwise “would run counter to overwhelming precedent, depart from longstanding constitutional tradition, and offend the rule of law.”

 

[eclipsenow]

Judge stayed skeptical.

Federal judge tosses Trump administration’s lawsuit against Maryland’s entire federal bench​

U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen granted a request by the judges to toss the case, saying to do otherwise “would run counter to overwhelming precedent, depart from longstanding constitutional tradition, and offend the rule of law.”

So far so good. Can things like this escalate up to the Supreme Court that Trump has stacked?

 

[Yttrium]

So far so good. Can things like this escalate up to the Supreme Court that Trump has stacked?

Trump didn't stack it with MAGA people. He stacked it with conservatives. They're not likely to side with him on situations like this.

 

[eclipsenow]

Trump didn't stack it with MAGA people. He stacked it with conservatives. They're not likely to side with him on situations like this.

Sure - but they did rule that a President is immune from prosecution.

So the rule of law? Not so much.

 

[Yttrium]

Sure - but they did rule that a President is immune from prosecution.

So the rule of law? Not so much.

Yeah, that's gonna come back to bite them.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Trump didn't stack it with MAGA people. He stacked it with conservatives. They're not likely to side with him on situations like this.

I'd like to think so. Such a ruling would mean Trump could sue SCOTUS if they ruled in a way he didn't like.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Appeals court invalidates many of Trump's tariffs. Next stop: The Supreme Court.​

The 7-4 ruling, issued by 11 judges for the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., allows the tariffs to remain in place while the administration decides on an appeal to the US Supreme Court.

The decision upholds a ruling handed down in May by the US Court of International Trade (CIT), saying that the president lacked legal authority to order, by way of executive orders, a series of global tariffs imposed on US trading partners.

Trump wrongly ended protections for Venezuelan migrants, US appeals court rules​

A federal appeals court on Friday ruled that U.S. President Donald Trump's administration had likely acted unlawfully when it rolled back temporary protections from deportation granted to 600,000 Venezuelans living in the United States during his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden's tenure.

A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a judge's ruling finding that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem likely lacked authority to cancel a Biden-era decision to extend Temporary Protected Status for eligible Venezuelans.

Federal judge blocks Trump effort to expand fast-track deportations​

U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb said foreigners impacted by the expansion “must be afforded due process under the Fifth Amendment.”

In a decision issued Friday evening, U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb granted a request by an immigrant advocacy group to put a hold on a pair of policies the administration issued in January that made millions more immigrants eligible for expulsion from the U.S. under a process known as “expedited removal.”

 

[Pommer]

I'd like to think so. Such a ruling would mean Trump could sue SCOTUS if they ruled in a way he didn't like.

What venue would hear such a case, one wonders?