The courts are putting the brakes on several of President Donald Trump’s efforts to swiftly reshape and cut down the federal government.
In the early days of his presidency, Trump signed over 50 executive orders aimed at altering the government, including initiatives on birthright citizenship and the housing of transgender inmates. These orders have also been used by government agencies to freeze federal funding across the nation and offer buyouts to many federal employees.
This flurry of executive actions has resulted in more than two dozen lawsuits, with several court decisions temporarily halting parts of Trump’s actions. At least three of these rulings came on Thursday.
On Thursday evening, two unions filed lawsuits against the Trump administration over its attempt to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Here’s a breakdown of some of the executive orders the courts have stopped:
DOGE Retirees and union members have filed a legal challenge to the Treasury Department’s decision to grant staffers from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) access to the government’s payment and collections system, which holds vast personal data. They argue that this move violates federal privacy laws and are seeking an order to block DOGE from accessing the data, as well as to retrieve any data already collected. The Justice Department has agreed to limit some access while awaiting a full hearing on February 24.
Additionally, a group of union members has filed a lawsuit to prevent DOGE from accessing sensitive information within the Labor Department.
A coalition of 12 states has also announced plans to sue over DOGE’s access to the Treasury system.
Government Buyouts In an effort to reduce the size of the federal workforce, the Office of Personnel Management introduced a “deferred resignation” program allowing employees to resign now and continue to be paid until September. The deadline to accept the offer was Thursday night, with 60,000 employees reportedly agreeing to the buyout.
Labor unions representing federal workers have sued to block the program, arguing the administration lacks the legal authority to offer such buyouts.
A federal judge in Boston issued a temporary injunction on Thursday, halting the buyouts until at least Monday, when a hearing will take place. This ruling also extended the deadline for employees to respond to the offer.
“We are thankful to the judge for extending the deadline, allowing more federal workers to take advantage of this generous, once-in-a-lifetime offer,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.
Birthright Citizenship One of Trump’s more contentious executive orders, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” aims to restrict birthright citizenship. It proposes limiting it to individuals whose parents are U.S. citizens or permanent residents, excluding those born to parents in the country temporarily, such as on work or student visas.
Numerous lawsuits have been filed challenging the order. This week, federal judges in Maryland and Washington state issued nationwide preliminary injunctions preventing it from taking effect.
In his ruling on Thursday, U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour stated, “Citizenship by birth is an unequivocal constitutional right.” The judge in Seattle echoed this, noting, “The President cannot change, limit, or qualify this Constitutional right through an executive order.”
The Justice Department filed an appeal on Thursday night regarding the Seattle decision.
Funding Freeze Federal judges temporarily blocked a funding freeze ordered by the Trump administration as part of its executive directives. The Office of Management and Budget had issued a memo directing federal agencies to pause all activities related to federal financial assistance and other relevant programs for review.
The memo was later withdrawn after confusion spread over which programs would be impacted, with many people and organizations unable to access federal aid.
In a ruling on Friday, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell in Rhode Island issued a temporary restraining order after the memo was rescinded, stating the White House’s actions seemed to violate the law. “Federal law specifies how the Executive should act if it believes appropriations are inconsistent with the President’s priorities — it must ask Congress, not act unilaterally,” he wrote.
U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan, in a separate case in Washington, D.C., noted that individuals were still having trouble accessing funding, even after the memo was withdrawn.
Transgender Inmates Trump’s order to ensure that “males are not detained in women’s prisons” triggered two lawsuits filed on behalf of four transgender women prisoners, who were scheduled to be transferred to male facilities. The plaintiffs argued that such a transfer would expose them to a heightened risk of violence and sexual assault.
Two judges have blocked their transfers.
In one case, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth in Washington, D.C., ruled that the public interest in relocating the inmates immediately was minimal. He also pointed out that the government had not demonstrated the transgender women posed a threat to female prisoners or that the situation couldn’t be managed by prison staff.
