Legal Actions

A U.S. citizen serving as a prosecutor at the International Criminal Court filed suit against President Trump, the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of State, challenging Executive Order 14203, “Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court.” The order imposed civil and criminal penalties on U.S. persons providing services to sanctioned ICC officials. Plaintiff argued that the order's broad reach placed him at risk of severe liability for his professional activities. He claimed the order exceeded presidential authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and violated the First Amendment, and he sought a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. Prior to the hearing, Plaintiff secured a specific license authorizing his work, thereby rendering his claims moot. Subsequently, on May 13, 2025, the Court dismissed the case after Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal.

A coalition of voter advocacy and privacy rights organizations, along with individual plaintiffs, filed a class action lawsuit challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s creation of centralized “Interagency Databases” that consolidate sensitive personal information from multiple federal and state sources. They allege the program, developed in collaboration with the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), violates the Privacy Act of 1974 and the U.S. Constitution by unlawfully collecting, merging, and using citizens’ data to initiate investigations and purge voter rolls. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to block the operation of these databases and to compel the deletion of unlawfully collected information.

Ten unaccompanied Guatemalan minors, on behalf of themselves and similarly situated children, filed an emergency complaint and motion for a temporary restraining order against federal immigration authorities. They challenge the government’s plan to summarily remove hundreds of Guatemalan children, including themselves, without the due process and protections Congress mandated for unaccompanied minors. Plaintiffs allege these removals violate the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the U.S. Constitution. They seek an immediate court order halting their transfer to Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody and preventing their deportation so they can pursue the statutory relief and protections guaranteed by law.

A coalition of two Commerce Department unions brings this action against President Trump and relevant federal officials, challenging Executive Order 14343. Plaintiffs allege that the Executive Order unlawfully strips federal employees of their collective bargaining rights in violation of the Civil Service Reform Act and the First Amendment’s protections for freedom of association. They contend that the Executive Order exceeds presidential authority and was issued in bad faith to dismantle lawful union representation within the civil service. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief restoring their collective bargaining rights and invalidating the Executive Order in its entirety. 

Nonprofits and a small business owner brought this case against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) for failing to implement Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires financial institutions to collect and report data on credit applications from women-owned, minority-owned, and small businesses. Plaintiffs allege that although CFPB admitted its duty in a 2020 settlement and finalized a Lending Transparency Rule in 2023, the agency has unlawfully delayed enforcement. They cite CFPB’s April 2025 announcement that it would not prioritize supervision or enforcement, followed by a June 2025 interim final rule postponing compliance until at least July 2026 without public notice or comment. Plaintiffs argue these actions violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and seek declaratory and injunctive relief compelling CFPB to enforce the rule and begin data collection immediately.

Five non-profit immigration and criminal defense organizations have brought this suit to challenge a secret U.S.-El Salvador agreement that allows the indefinite detention of U.S. deportees, including asylum seekers and citizens, in brutal Salvadoran mega-prisons. This agreement, which plaintiffs argue bypasses Congress and violates U.S. and international law, involves covert U.S. funding to El Salvador for these incommunicado detentions. The lawsuit seeks to stop the U.S. government from outsourcing human rights abuses and argues that the State Department's deal violates the Administrative Procedure Act, exceeds executive authority, and endangers lives. It demands the agreement be publicized, declared illegal, and halted.

Hunger Free America, a nonprofit to end domestic hunger, has sued the Trump administration for failure to uphold its legal obligation to maintain a nationwide database of food assistance resources through a contract with a nongovernmental organization. The administration abruptly allowed the contract to expire without explanation and has since failed to meet its legal requirement for a food assistance clearinghouse. Plaintiff Hunger Free America alleges that this action violates the Administrative Procedure Act. On September 8, 2025, Hunger Free America filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal after the defendants informed Hunger Free America that it had been awarded the USDA National Hunger Clearinghouse Services contract for the 2025-2026 contract year, with four potential additional contract year options.

The State of California and Governor Gavin Newsom have sued the Trump administration for the federal deployment and federalization of up to 4,000 California National Guard members without the Governor’s consent. The plaintiffs argue that the action was unlawful and violated the Posse Comitatus Act, the Tenth Amendment, and the Administrative Procedure Act.