• Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Investing
  • Stock
Editor's Pick

Here’s why dozens of lawsuits seeking to quash Trump’s early actions as president are failing

by February 27, 2025
written by February 27, 2025

The Trump administration’s lawyers have spent significant time in court this month fighting dozens of requests filed by legal groups, labor organizations and a litany of other state and local plaintiffs across the country – and so far, most judges haven’t granted these requests.

The courts ‘are rightfully saying we don’t have jurisdiction over this,’ or, in certain cases, that plaintiffs ‘aren’t proving harm,’ Fox News legal editor Kerri Kupec Urbahn, a former spokesperson for Attorney General Bill Barr, said of the numerous legal challenges to Trump’s agenda. 

The lawsuits, totaling more than 80, are aimed at blocking or reversing some of Trump’s most controversial actions and executive orders. 

Nearly all plaintiffs are seeking, in addition to the long-term injunctive relief, a temporary restraining order, or TRO, from a federal judge that would block the order or policy from taking force until the merits of the case can be heard. 

Almost all these requests for emergency relief have been rejected in court, with judges noting that plaintiffs lacked standing, and ordering both parties to return for a later hearing date to consider the merits of the case.

Some Trump allies and legal commentators have criticized the many lawsuits as a way for plaintiffs to skip over the traditional administrative appeals process and take their case directly to the courts instead – a pattern they say has prompted the wave of rejections by federal judges. 

There is an internal review process for agency-specific actions or directives, which can be challenged via appeals to administrative law judges or an agency-specific court. 

But doing so for executive orders or presidential actions is much more difficult.

According to information from the Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register, a president’s executive order can be revoked or modified only by the president or via the legislative branch, if the president was acting on authority that had been granted by Congress.

Since the latter is not immediately applicable to the Trump-era orders many of the lawsuits hinge on, that leaves the courts as one of the limited arbiters for determining whether to let stand the orders or action in question. 

That means the requests for injunctive relief are considered in a sort of two-part wave of proceedings, since most – if not all – Trump-era complaints include both the request for the TRO and for the preliminary injunction. 

The TRO requests are the first wave of ‘mini-arguments’ to come before U.S. judges tasked with reviewing the complaints. 

They are heard immediately and require plaintiffs to prove they will suffer irreparable injury or harm if their request for relief is not granted— a difficult burden to satisfy, especially when the order or policy has not yet come into force. 

(As one judge remarked earlier this month, the court cannot grant TRO requests based on speculation.)

The courts then order both parties to re-appear at a later date to consider the request for preliminary injunction, which allows both sides to present a fuller argument and for the court to take into account the harm or damages incurred. 

‘The bottom line is that courts typically do not grant requests for emergency relief at the start of a lawsuit,’ Suzanne Goldberg, a Lawfare contributor and professor at Columbia Law School, wrote in a recent op-ed. 

‘Instead, they wait to decide what remedies a plaintiff deserves, if any, until after each side makes its legal arguments and introduces its evidence, including evidence obtained from the other side through the discovery process.’

These near-term court victories have buoyed Trump allies and the Department of Government Efficiency, allowing DOGE, at least for now, to continue carrying out their ambitious early-days agenda and claiming ‘victory.’ 

‘LFG,’ Elon Musk cheered on X recently, in response to a court’s rejection of a request from labor unions seeking to block DOGE access to federal agency information.

Other accounts have praised the overwhelming court rejections of emergency restraining orders as evidence that the Trump administration, and DOGE, are ‘winning’ – a characterization that legal experts warn is largely premature.

In fact, they’ve noted, the slow-moving legal challenges and nature of the court calendar are features, not bugs.

This includes efforts to block or curtail DOGE from accessing internal government information or firing agency employees; lawsuits aimed at blocking the Trump administration’s transgender military ban; and complaints seeking to block the release or public identification of FBI personnel involved in Jan. 6 investigations, among many other things.

But that’s not because every one of these actions is legitimate. Rather, legal experts say, the near-term ‘victories’ hinge on the limited power a judge has to intervene in proving emergency relief, or granting temporary restraining orders.

Judges, including U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, noted previously that fear and speculation alone are not enough to curtail DOGE access: plaintiffs must prove clearly, and with evidence, that their workings have met the hard-to-satisfy test of permanent or ‘irreparable’ harm.

Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that plaintiffs must be able to show evidence that a rule, action or policy in question will result in ‘immediate, irreparable harm’ to satisfy a TRO request. 

That’s a difficult burden of proof, and a near impossible one for plaintiffs to satisfy, especially for an action that has not yet taken effect. 

One exception is the Trump administration’s ban on birthright citizenship. 

The request for immediate relief, was granted by multiple U.S. district courts judges, who sided with plaintiffs in ruling that hundreds of children born in the U.S. were at risk of real harm. 

It was also upheld by a U.S. appeals court last week, setting the stage for a possible Supreme Court fight.

But barring that, most of the lawsuits will play out in the longer-term, Goldberg, wrote in the Lawfare op-ed.

‘Stepping back, the current litigation landscape of TROs and preliminary injunctions may seem quite extraordinary… But considered in context, these many provisional orders suggest that even more extraordinary are the government’s threatened actions, both in their likely unlawfulness and their potential for irreparable harm,’ she said.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

previous post
PEDO Act: Lawmaker moves to protect Epstein files, accuses ‘certain FBI agents’ of trying to destroy docs
next post
Trump accepts second state visit to UK, reveals letter from King Charles

related articles

Trump says he will require voter ID with...

August 31, 2025

Trump nominees squeezed between ‘blue slips’ and blue...

August 31, 2025

Trump appointee exits US foreign aid agency after...

August 31, 2025

Sen. Bernie Sanders calls on RFK Jr. to...

August 31, 2025

Israel eliminates Houthi prime minister in Yemen airstrike...

August 31, 2025

Dyan Cannon denied White House entry after lying...

August 30, 2025

Epstein estate to hand over ‘birthday book’ to...

August 30, 2025

CDC official who blasted Trump’s ‘weak science’ led...

August 30, 2025

Top Senate Republican ready to ‘roll over’ Democrats...

August 30, 2025

Legal group sues FDA over puberty blocker records,...

August 30, 2025
Enter Your Information Below To Receive Free Trading Ideas, Latest News, And Articles.


Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!

Latest News

  • US flies joint patrol with the Philippines near shoal region guarded by China

    February 4, 2025
  • Middle East: US Seeks to Deter Future Attacks

    August 15, 2024
  • Ethereum goes sideways on Wednesday above $2600

    September 25, 2024
  • Nuclear watchdog urges ‘trust but verify’ that Iran engages in good-faith negotiations

    April 23, 2025
  • Former Biden official ‘pleased’ Trump admin tackling antisemitism

    April 23, 2025

Popular Posts

  • 1

    Secret Service admits leaning on ‘state and local partners’ after claim it ignored Trump team’s past requests

    July 21, 2024
  • 2

    Five more House Democrats call on Biden to drop out, third US senator

    July 19, 2024
  • 3

    Elon and Vivek should tackle US funding for this boondoogle organization and score a multimillion dollar win

    December 4, 2024
  • 4

    Forex Profit Calculator: Maximize Your Trading Potential

    July 10, 2024
  • 5

    Biden calls to ‘lower the temperature’ then bashes Trump in NAACP speech

    July 17, 2024

Categories

  • Economy (829)
  • Editor's Pick (5,865)
  • Investing (634)
  • Stock (912)

Latest Posts

  • FBI investigating Iran’s hack of Trump campaign documents

    August 13, 2024
  • NRCC launches ad campaign targeting dozens of vulnerable Dems who voted against key Trump proposal

    April 11, 2025
  • Solana and Cardano: Cardano at a new September high

    September 26, 2024

Recent Posts

  • DAVID MARCUS: GOP owes RFK Jr. big time, and the debt is due

    January 29, 2025
  • Major Cryptocurrencies Experience Significant Declines

    January 27, 2025
  • Behind the scenes of the prisoner swap to free WSJ reporter Evan Gershkovich from Russian prison

    August 2, 2024

Editor’s Pick

  • ‘Hurting people to help themselves’: Dem senator disses DOGE’s CFPB cuts

    March 10, 2025
  • Explosive new intelligence report reveals Iran’s nuclear weapons program still active

    May 28, 2025
  • ROBERT MAGINNIS: What comes next for US, Russia and Ukraine after Alaska summit

    August 16, 2025
  • About us
  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Disclaimer: moneyrisetoday.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

Copyright © 2025 moneyrisetoday.com | All Rights Reserved

Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Investing
  • Stock