Federal judges issued another round of rulings against the Trump administration on Friday, blocking executive actions that targeted law firms involved in investigations of the president, sought to dismantle key federal agencies, and conducted deportations without due process.
These decisions are the latest in a long series of judicial defeats for Trump, who has faced more lawsuits and injunctions than any modern president—not because of partisan bias in the courts, but because his administration has repeatedly attempted to bypass legal and constitutional limits.
One ruling temporarily halted Trump’s retaliation against two major law firms, Jenner & Block and WilmerHale, which had participated in probes of his misconduct.
The orders came shortly after the president announced a separate deal with the firm Skadden Arps to provide $100 million in legal work supporting his agenda, a contrast that legal experts say underscores his pattern of punishing perceived enemies while rewarding allies.
Meanwhile, the administration moved forward with its near-total dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development, notifying remaining staff that their jobs would be eliminated, leaving only the 15 employees required by statute.
A separate federal judge intervened to stop the gutting of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, calling the administration’s attempt to dissolve the agency unlawful.
In another case, a judge blocked Trump’s policy of deporting migrants to countries other than their own without allowing them to contest removal, ruling that the administration must first assess whether they would face persecution or torture.
Legal scholars note that the frequency of these defeats is not accidental.
Past presidents have occasionally overstepped and been reined in by courts, but Trump’s losses stand out because his administration has systematically tested legal boundaries, often ignoring established precedent and procedure.
The rulings reflect a consistent finding across jurisdictions and judges appointed by both parties: that this administration’s actions frequently violate the law.
After GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson threatened to cut off funding if the judiciary kept doing its job, progressive anti-establishment Democrat Lisa McCormick said, “The problem isn’t judges—it’s a president who keeps breaking the law.”
Whether the pattern will change in the future remains uncertain, but for now, the courts continue to serve as the final arbiter in disputes where the executive branch refuses to govern within constitutional constraints.
Discover more from NJTODAY.NET
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.