Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Secretary Hegseth provides inconsistent testimony on Iran war objectives — During Senate Appropriations Committee testimony, Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) questioned Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth about statements made early in the Iran conflict claiming core objectives were to "destroy the missile threat" and "obliterate Iran's missiles and drones." Hegseth had declared four months earlier that all objectives had been achieved. When pressed, Hegseth declined to confirm whether the missile threat had been defeated, instead redefining "combat ineffective" to mean Iran could not deploy missiles at scale against the United States. Ossoff noted that Hegseth had assured the American people of Iranian surrender on day nine of the war and asked whether his statement that Iran's military had been "destroyed and made combat ineffective" was truthful.
• Senator Murray challenged Hegseth's claim that Iran's missile program is "functionally destroyed." — Senator Patty Murray cited Hegseth's April 8 statement that Iran's missile program was "functionally destroyed" with "launchers, production facilities and existing stockpiles depleted and decimated." She noted that Iran has been firing missiles at U.S. military bases and ships for the past week, contradicting Hegseth's assessment. Hegseth responded only that "Iran is at the weakest point militarily it has ever been in in the past decade."
• Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chair Caine testified on $1.5 trillion DOD budget request. — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine testified before the Senate to defend a $1.5 trillion DOD budget request—nearly double the 2024 budget of $841 billion. Hegseth stated "not funding this department at $1.5 trillion is the greatest threat our nation faces," while Caine acknowledged air power has limits in achieving military objectives.
• Senator Durbin questioned unobligated DOD funding and "woke priorities" pivot. — Senator Dick Durbin asked Hegseth about $75 billion in unobligated DOD funding from the prior year's reconciliation package. Hegseth acknowledged the figure and stated "There's plans and designs on that - move away from all the woke priorities of what the Biden admin was pursuing," indicating funds would be redirected away from diversity and inclusion initiatives.
• Senator Merkley pressed Caine on civilian infrastructure targeting in retaliation. — Senator Jeff Merkley questioned Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine on whether the U.S. would target civilian infrastructure in retaliatory strikes, noting that international law prohibits such targeting. Caine responded only that "we have a robust process," declining to provide explicit assurance that civilian infrastructure would be protected.
• Senator Murray questioned necessity of National Guard funding and Caribbean strikes for Iran war. — Senator Patty Murray asked Hegseth why "billions of dollars more for the National Guard and this administration's illegal strikes in the Caribbean" are urgently needed for the Iran war. Hegseth responded by blaming "gross negligence and neglect of the Biden admin" without addressing the substance of her question about the connection between Caribbean operations and Iran conflict.
• Senator Reed challenged Hegseth on war authorization and Strait of Hormuz contingencies. — Senator Jack Reed accused Hegseth of "gross negligence" for failing to fully inform Trump that the Strait of Hormuz could be effectively closed by Iranian action. Reed questioned whether Trump should be "praised for starting war without authority" and creating conditions where "the world economy is suffering tremendously," challenging the administration's failure to obtain congressional authorization.
• Senator Reed questioned whether airstrikes alone will defeat Iran; Caine declined to address ground troop escalation. — Senator Jack Reed asked Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine whether airstrikes alone would defeat Iran. Caine acknowledged that "air power has got limits" but declined to address whether ground combat escalation would follow, stating "I think it'd be unhelpful for me to opine on hypotheticals."

Supporting reports

• Justice Department appeals ICE protest-response injunction — The Department of Justice filed a notice of appeal challenging a federal court injunction issued on Friday that curtailed aggressive ICE and federal agency tactics against protesters, including restrictions on pepper spray, weapon display, and arrest of observers. The appeal signals the administration's intent to overturn limits on law enforcement conduct during immigration enforcement operations.

Supporting reports

• Supreme Court rejected Trump administration's argument to deploy federalized National Guard in Chicago — On December 23, 2025, the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration's legal argument that it possessed the power to deploy federalized National Guard troops in and around Chicago. The decision limited Trump's authority to use military forces within the United States without explicit congressional authorization or state consent.
• Supreme Court rejected Trump administration's National Guard deployment authority in Chicago — On December 23, 2025, the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration's argument that it possessed the power to deploy federalized National Guard troops in and around Chicago. The 6-3 decision blocked the administration's attempt to militarize American cities without state consent.
• Supreme Court rejects Trump's National Guard deployment in Illinois as unlawful — The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 preliminary ruling that President Trump's deployment of federalized National Guard troops in the Chicago area beginning in October violated the Posse Comitatus Act. The majority held that a president must first attempt to execute laws using regular U.S. military forces and may deploy the National Guard only if unable to do so with regular forces. The Court found the Government failed to identify statutory or constitutional authority permitting military enforcement of laws in Illinois.
• Supreme Court rejected Trump's National Guard deployment for immigration enforcement in Illinois — The Supreme Court rejected Trump's deployment of the National Guard to aid immigration enforcement in Illinois, ruling that federal law limits use of the National Guard to situations where regular military forces are insufficient. The majority found that the President does not have inherent authority to deploy the military to protect ICE property. Three justices (Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch) dissented.
• Supreme Court blocks Trump administration from deploying National Guard in Illinois — The Supreme Court blocked the Trump administration from deploying National Guard troops in Illinois as part of his mass immigration crackdown, ruling that the government "failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois." The decision represents a rare judicial check on executive power in the Trump administration.
• Supreme Court Denies Stay in Trump v. Illinois — On December 23, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the federal government's request for a stay in the case of Trump v. Illinois. This decision upheld a lower court's order that barred the Trump administration from deploying the federalized National Guard in Illinois for immigration enforcement actions. The case arose after the Trump administration federalized the Texas and Illinois National Guard to assist with immigration enforcement in Chicago, which was challenged by the state of Illinois. The Supreme Court's denial means the federal government cannot deploy the National Guard in Illinois pending further legal proceedings. Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissented from the decision.
• US Supreme Court blocks Trump national guard deployment to Chicago — The US Supreme Court denied the Trump administration's emergency request to lift a lower court order blocking the deployment of national guard troops to the Chicago area. In a 6-3 decision, the majority ruled that the government failed to meet the legal burden required to show it could not enforce immigration laws without federal military intervention. The decision upholds a ruling by US District Judge April Perry from October and signals potential impact on similar deployments in other Democratic-led cities.

Supporting reports

• FCC Chair Brendan Carr testified that the FCC is under full control of Trump and is not an independent agency. — FCC Chair Brendan Carr testified before the Senate that the FCC is not an independent agency but rather under full control of Trump. Shortly after the testimony, the Trump administration scrubbed any references to the FCC being independent from the agency's website.
• FCC chair declares agency not independent; removes "independent" from mission statement — FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told the Senate Commerce Committee on Wednesday that the FCC is "not an independent agency, formally speaking." Shortly before his testimony, the word "independent" was removed from the FCC's official website mission statement, which had previously described it as "an independent US government agency overseen by Congress." The action raised concerns about Trump administration efforts to exert greater control over independent agencies.

Supporting reports

• Supreme Court oral arguments on Trump's FTC firing and presidential removal power — The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether President Trump lawfully fired FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter in March 2025. The case challenges the 90-year-old Humphrey's Executor precedent that has protected independent agency heads from at-will presidential removal. Conservative justices signaled support for Trump's "unitary executive" theory, suggesting they may overturn the New Deal-era protection. The ruling could expand presidential power over more than two dozen independent agencies. A decision is expected by June 2026.
• Supreme Court oral arguments on presidential removal power over independent agencies — The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Trump's assertion that he has complete control over officers in independent agencies established by Congress. Solicitor General John Sauer argued the president must have removal power because "the President must have the power to control and…the one who has the power to remove is the one who…is the person that they have to fear and obey." Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson warned that allowing a president to fire all scientists, doctors, economists, and PhDs and replace them with loyalists would harm the country. The Court is expected to rule in June, with the right-wing majority appearing poised to grant Trump broad removal authority.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration orders targeted infrastructure cuts and federal workforce layoffs during shutdown — During the 42-day shutdown, Russell Vought, White House Office of Management and Budget director, ordered layoffs of federal employees beyond the standard furloughs and cut infrastructure project funding in states that voted for Kamala Harris in 2024. These actions exploited the funding lapse to achieve partisan policy objectives without congressional authorization, targeting opposition-aligned jurisdictions for fiscal punishment.

Supporting reports

• Supreme Court ruling on National Labor Relations Board firing — The U.S. Supreme Court upheld President Trump's firing of the head of the National Labor Relations Board, Gwynne Wilcox, affirming Congress's power to limit a president's ability to remove officials from independent agencies. This ruling reflects the court's conservative stance on executive power and its alignment with the unitary executive theory, which grants the president significant control over the executive branch.

Supporting reports

• White House issues fact sheet on new federal employee classification removing civil service protections — The White House Office of Personnel Management issued a fact sheet on April 18, 2025, announcing a proposed rule to create a new "Schedule Policy/Career" category for approximately 50,000 federal employees in policy-influencing roles. The fact sheet states these employees will become at-will workers without access to adverse action procedures or appeals, enabling agencies to remove them without lengthy procedural requirements. The rule implements an executive order titled "Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce," reversing Biden-era protections.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration orders mass layoffs at Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — The Trump administration, through staff from Elon Musk's "Department of Government Efficiency," issued reduction-in-force letters terminating approximately 1,500 of the CFPB's 1,700 employees on April 17. The layoffs eliminated entire divisions including the office of servicemember affairs, office of older Americans, and office of fair lending. According to an employee declaration, the effort was managed by Gavin Kliger and staff were kept working 36 hours straight to ensure notices went out. Employees raised concerns about violations of court orders requiring "particularized assessment," but were told "all that mattered was the numbers."
• Federal judge bars Trump administration from rapid deportation policy — Federal Judge Brian Murphy on Friday barred the Trump administration from implementing a new policy that would allow it to rapidly deport hundreds or thousands of immigrants to countries other than their own without giving them an opportunity to demonstrate they face persecution, torture, or death. The ruling blocks a policy that would circumvent due process protections for asylum seekers and vulnerable migrants.
• Federal judge blocks mass layoffs at Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued a ruling blocking the Trump administration's termination of approximately 1,500 of the CFPB's 1,700 employees, announced on Thursday via reduction-in-force letters. The layoffs, orchestrated by staff from Elon Musk's "Department of Government Efficiency," eliminated entire divisions including servicemember affairs, older Americans, and fair lending offices. The judge's order came after a federal appeals court had modified (but not eliminated) an earlier injunction limiting the agency's ability to terminate staff. The administration's compliance with the ruling remains unclear.

Supporting reports

• Trump signs Executive Order 14251 excluding federal agencies from labor-management relations coverage — President Trump signed Executive Order 14251 on March 27, 2025, excluding numerous federal agencies and subdivisions from coverage under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Chapter 71, Title 5, U.S.C.) and the Foreign Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Subchapter X, Chapter 52, Title 22, U.S.C.). The order amends Executive Order 12171 and designates agencies including State, Defense, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, Justice, HHS, DHS, Interior, Energy, Agriculture, EPA, USAID, NRC, NSF, USITC, FCC, and GSA as having primary national security functions incompatible with collective bargaining. It delegates authority to the Secretaries of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Transportation to issue further exclusions or suspensions. The order requires agency heads to reassign affected employees and terminate pending grievance proceedings upon collective bargaining agreement termination.
• Office of Personnel Management issues guidance implementing union elimination order — Following Trump's executive order, the Office of Personnel Management issued a memo providing guidance to federal departments and subdivisions on implementation, which includes terminating existing collective bargaining agreements and ending voluntary union dues collection through payroll systems. The directive applies across multiple agencies affecting hundreds of thousands of federal workers.
• Trump administration issues executive order stripping collective bargaining rights from federal workers — On 27 March, President Trump issued an executive order citing national security to exempt collective bargaining at several federal departments, affecting more than 1 million federal workers. The order was accompanied by lawsuits filed by the Trump administration against federal unions, including the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union, in Texas and Kentucky courts. Unions have filed motions to dismiss and counter-lawsuits, and bipartisan legislation has been introduced in the House to restore bargaining rights. A federal judge in Washington DC granted a preliminary injunction blocking the order on 25 April.
• Trump signs executive order eliminating collective bargaining for federal workers — President Trump signed an executive order on Thursday that attempts to eliminate collective bargaining rights for hundreds of thousands of federal workers across more than 30 agencies. The Office of Personnel Management issued guidance directing departments to terminate collective bargaining agreements and end voluntary union dues collection. The Trump administration subsequently filed a lawsuit in Texas court seeking declaratory relief to rescind or repudiate collective bargaining agreements, citing national security and personnel policy constraints. Union leaders representing approximately 1.2 million federal workers have condemned the order as union-busting and retaliatory, vowing immediate legal action.
• Trump issues executive order excluding major federal agencies from labor-management relations protections — President Trump signed an executive order on March 27, 2025, excluding numerous federal agencies and subdivisions from coverage under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Chapter 71, Title 5, U.S.C.) and the Foreign Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Subchapter X, Chapter 52, Title 22, U.S.C.). The order designates State, Defense, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, Justice, HHS, DHS, Interior, Energy, Agriculture, Commerce, EPA, USAID, NRC, NSF, USITC, FCC, GSA, and other agencies as having primary national security functions, thereby removing collective bargaining protections from thousands of federal employees. Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs retain limited authority to restore coverage for specific subdivisions if they certify national security compatibility; the Secretary of Transportation gains broad discretion to exclude DOT and FAA subdivisions.
• Trump signed Executive Order 14251 excluding major federal agencies from labor-management relations protections — President Trump signed Executive Order 14251 on March 27, 2025, excluding numerous federal agencies and subdivisions from coverage under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Chapter 71 of title 5, U.S.C.) and related foreign service labor protections. The order claims national security justification and removes collective bargaining rights from employees in the State Department, Defense Department, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, Justice Department, HHS (including CDC and FDA), DHS (including USCIS, ICE, and FEMA), Interior, Energy, Agriculture, Commerce, EPA, USAID, NRC, NSF, ITC, FCC, GSA, and numerous other agencies. The order delegates authority to the Secretaries of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Transportation to issue further exclusions or suspensions.
• White House issues fact sheet on executive order exempting national security agencies from federal collective bargaining — The White House published a fact sheet on March 27, 2025, describing an executive order signed by President Trump that exempts agencies with national security missions from federal collective bargaining requirements under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. The order applies to specified components of the Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Department of Homeland Security, Department of State, Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice, Department of Treasury, Department of Commerce, and other agencies. The fact sheet states the order aims to prevent union obstruction of agency management and policy implementation.
• Trump administration files lawsuit to rescind federal worker collective bargaining agreements — The Trump administration filed a lawsuit in a Texas court seeking declaratory relief to confirm its legal authority to rescind or repudiate collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) with federal workers. The lawsuit claims CBAs "significantly constrain" the executive branch and that rescinding them is necessary to protect national security and develop personnel policies otherwise precluded by the agreements. The filing seeks legal certainty before implementing the executive order's directive to eliminate collective bargaining.
• Department of Justice filed declaratory judgment lawsuit against American Federation of Government Employees affiliates — The Department of Justice announced it filed a lawsuit in the Western District of Texas on March 27, 2025, on behalf of eight federal agencies against locals, councils, and Division 10 of the American Federation of Government Employees. The suit seeks a declaratory judgment confirming the agencies' legal right to terminate collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) with the union. The filing followed a presidential Executive Order titled "Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs" that determined certain agencies performing investigative and national security work need not collectively bargain. The agencies argue CBAs impede national security missions and workforce accountability.

Supporting reports

• Judge issues restraining order against DOGE — U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander issued a temporary restraining order against the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), prohibiting the Social Security Administration from sharing personally identifiable information with DOGE. The judge criticized DOGE for lacking justification for its access to SSA records, highlighting concerns about privacy and government overreach.
• DOGE conducted unauthorized searches of Social Security data after court restraining order — According to the Department of Justice court filing, DOGE team members conducted searches of personally identifiable information on March 24, 2025, even after the Social Security Administration believed it had revoked all such access in compliance with a federal court's temporary restraining order issued March 20, 2025. The final search occurred at approximately 9:30 a.m., with full access terminated by noon that day. DOGE members had also been granted access to systems beyond what the agency previously reported to the court, including employee records and personnel access information.
• Federal judge blocked DOGE access to federal agency data — A federal judge temporarily blocked Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing the private data of individuals at several federal agencies. The block prevents DOGE from obtaining sensitive personal information held by the government.
• DOGE staffer signed agreement to share Social Security data with election denial group — In March 2025, a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staffer embedded at the Social Security Administration signed a "Voter Data Agreement" with a political advocacy group seeking to overturn election results in certain states. According to a court filing by government lawyers, the DOGE employee sent the executed agreement on March 24, 2025. Emails suggest DOGE team members could have been asked to assist the group by accessing SSA data to match voter rolls. The SSA referred the involved employees to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel for possible Hatch Act violations.
• Federal judge blocks DOGE access to federal employee personal databases — On February 3, Popular Information reported that DOGE staff at the Office of Personnel Management received unprecedented access to databases containing sensitive personal information for millions of federal employees. A week later, a coalition of labor unions representing federal workers sued OPM citing Popular Information's report seven times. On March 24, a federal judge issued an injunction blocking DOGE's access to the databases.

Supporting reports

• Judge rules USAid shutdown likely violated US Constitution — A federal judge, Theodore Chuang, ruled that Elon Musk and the "department of government efficiency" (Doge) likely violated the US Constitution by shutting down USAid. The judge ordered the Trump administration to reverse actions taken to dismantle the agency, including halting efforts to terminate USAid officials and contractors, and reinstating former employees' access to government systems. The ruling also requires allowing USAid to return to its headquarters if the underlying case is successful. The administration is expected to appeal the decision.
• Federal judge blocked DOGE cuts to USAID — A federal judge ruled the dismantling of USAID likely violates the Constitution and blocked DOGE from making any further cuts to the agency, protecting the congressionally-created development organization.
• Judge Chuang rules against destruction of USAID — U.S. District Judge Theodore D. Chuang issued a 68-page decision finding that the actions of Elon Musk and the "Department of Government Efficiency" to dismantle the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) likely violated the Constitution. Chuang ordered parts of USAID to be restored, emphasizing the agency's importance to public interest and congressional authority.

Supporting reports

• Judge temporarily blocks Trump’s mass firings at federal agencies — A federal judge in California, William Alsup, has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from executing mass firings of federal employees, including probationary workers, across various agencies. The judge ruled that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) lacked the authority to order such firings. The decision came after a lawsuit filed by labor unions and non-profit organizations. The judge ordered the OPM to rescind emails directing agencies to identify employees for termination. The ruling highlights concerns about the potential widespread harm of these firings on government services.
• Judge blocks Trump's mass firings at federal agencies — A federal judge in California has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from proceeding with mass firings at the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. This judicial intervention halts the administration's plans to significantly reduce the federal workforce, which had been criticized for potentially undermining the functioning of essential government services.
• Judge orders rescission of mass firings at federal agencies — U.S. District Judge William Alsup ordered the Office of Personnel Management to rescind the mass firings of probationary government workers, ruling that such actions were likely illegal and undermined agency operations.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration targets NOAA with budget cuts — The Trump administration has initiated significant budget cuts and a political crackdown on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a leading US climate research agency. The administration plans to reduce NOAA's budget by roughly a third, affecting staffing and halting projects focused on inclusion and equity. Representatives from the "department of government efficiency" have demanded access to NOAA's IT systems and editorial control over intranet sites. These actions are part of a broader effort to align NOAA's operations with Trump's executive orders, potentially dismantling the agency's climate research capabilities.
• Trump administration fires hundreds at NOAA — The Trump administration has terminated hundreds of employees at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a key climate research agency within the Department of Commerce. The firings, which occurred on a Thursday afternoon, primarily affected probationary employees, including those hired through Schedule A, which supports diverse candidates such as veterans and people with disabilities. This move has sparked criticism from various quarters, including lawmakers and scientific experts, who argue that the cuts will harm NOAA's ability to provide critical weather forecasts and climate data, ultimately affecting public safety and national security.
• NOAA announces cuts to workforce — The Trump administration has fired hundreds of workers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a key climate research agency within the Department of Commerce. The firings specifically targeted probationary employees, affecting roughly 10% of the agency's workforce. This move has sparked criticism from Democratic lawmakers who warn that the cuts could jeopardize national security and public safety by leaving NOAA understaffed and unable to perform its critical functions effectively.
• — The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced cuts of 800 workers, with potential further cuts bringing the total to 1,000, impacting its ability to monitor climate change and provide essential weather reports.

Supporting reports

• Judge blocks Musk agency access to personal data — U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman issued a temporary restraining order preventing Elon Musk's "department of government efficiency" (Doge) from accessing sensitive personal information of millions of Americans. The ruling stops the Department of Education and the Office of Personnel Management from sharing federal employees' and student borrowers' data with Doge, citing potential violations of federal privacy laws. This decision follows a lawsuit by federal employee unions, student loan recipients, and veterans, and represents a significant judicial check on Doge's activities since its establishment by a January executive order.
• Federal court issues injunction against DOGE — On February 24, 2025, a federal court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), preventing it from disclosing personally identifiable information of federal employees to the DOGE team. This decision followed a lawsuit filed by a coalition of labor unions, which cited a report by Popular Information and Musk Watch. The court found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in their claim that OPM's actions violated the Privacy Act. The TRO is set to expire on March 10, 2025, pending further court determination.
• Judge blocks data sharing with Musk's department — A federal judge temporarily blocked the Department of Education and Office of Personnel Management from sharing sensitive data with Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. This decision addresses concerns about data privacy and security.
• Federal judge blocks Doge from accessing personal data — A federal judge temporarily blocked Elon Musk's "department of government efficiency" (Doge) from accessing sensitive personal information of millions of Americans. This decision challenges the Trump administration's efforts to downsize the federal government by limiting Doge's access to data maintained by the US education department and the US office of personnel management.

Supporting reports

• Federal judges block DOGE from accessing Treasury data — At least two federal judges have blocked Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing sensitive data from the Department of the Treasury. This action follows a lawsuit filed by Public Citizen on behalf of federal unions and a nonprofit organization, which argued that DOGE's access to such information would violate privacy rights. The Department of Justice agreed to restrict DOGE's access to Treasury data, except for two special employees who were granted limited access. One of these employees resigned after past racist social media posts were discovered.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — New York et al v. Donald J. Trump (S.D.N.Y.) 1:25-cv-01144 — Judge Vargas granted a limited preliminary injunction, enjoining the Treasury Department from granting access to DOGE-affiliated individuals to any payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees. The court noted that “a real possibility exists that sensitive information has already been shared outside of the Treasury Department, in potential violation of federal law.” The court ordered the Treasury Department to submit a report by March 24 including several forms of information and certifications including “the vetting and security clearances processes that members of the Treasury DOGE Team have undergone;” ”setting forth the legal authority pursuant to which each DOGE Team member was employed by or detailed to the Treasury Department;” and “explaining the reporting chains that govern the relationship between the DOGE Team members, USDS/DOGE, and Treasury leadership.”

Supporting reports

• Department of Justice announces removal of constitutional protections for administrative law judges — The Department of Justice, through Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle, announced on February 20, 2025, that it has determined multiple layers of removal restrictions protecting administrative law judges (ALJs) are unconstitutional. The department stated it is removing these protections to restore "constitutional accountability" and ensure Executive Branch officials answer to the President. The announcement invokes Supreme Court precedent but does not specify which case or provide legal analysis.

Supporting reports

• Senate confirms Russell Vought as OMB director — Russell Vought was confirmed by the US Senate as the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) following a narrow, party-line vote. Vought, a Trump appointee, has been a controversial figure due to his advocacy for a powerful executive branch and his role in the Project 2025 blueprint. His confirmation was met with opposition from Democrats, who boycotted the vote and criticized his past actions, including a freeze on federal grant funding. Vought's confirmation signals a continuation of policies aimed at reducing the influence of federal agencies.

Supporting reports

• Vought confirmed as OMB director — Despite Senator Angus King's objections, the Senate confirmed Russell Vought as the director of the Office of Management and Budget. King had warned that Vought's views on presidential power posed a threat to the constitutional structure of the government.
• Senate confirms Russell Vought — The US Senate confirmed Russell Vought, a co-author of Project 2025, to lead the White House budget office. Vought's confirmation reflects the administration's commitment to its policy agenda and budgetary priorities.
• Senate confirms Russell Vought as OMB director — Russell Vought was confirmed by the US Senate as the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) following a narrow, party-line vote. Vought, a Trump appointee, has been a controversial figure due to his advocacy for a powerful executive branch and his role in the Project 2025 blueprint. His confirmation was met with opposition from Democrats, who boycotted the vote and criticized his past actions, including a freeze on federal grant funding. Vought's confirmation signals a continuation of policies aimed at reducing the influence of federal agencies.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration issues guidance for Schedule Policy/Career — The Office of Personnel Management issued guidance to agency heads on January 27 for implementing "Schedule Policy/Career," a plan to replace nonpartisan civil service protections with positions loyal to Trump. This move reinstates a controversial plan from Trump's first term, which was rescinded by Biden, and aims to strip tens of thousands of federal workers of their civil service protections.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration halts federal grants and loans — On January 27, the Trump administration ordered a pause on all federal government grants and loans, requiring that they ban diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. This directive affects a wide range of federal programs and funding.
• Trump freezes federal grants, loans, and payments — President Trump ordered an immediate freeze on federal grants, loans, and payments to millions of Americans, citing a need to review their appropriateness and potential ties to DEI initiatives. This action, which affects funds previously allocated by Congress, has been criticized as illegal under the 1974 Impound Control Act. The freeze has caused widespread confusion and concern, with reports of Medicaid portals being down nationwide and various federal programs in disarray.
• Trump administration freezes federal funding for DEI and environmental programs — The Trump administration announced a freeze on federal grants targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and environmental initiatives, described as "illegal DEI programs" and "green new scam" initiatives. This funding pause, set to activate on the evening of January 28, 2025, could impact trillions of dollars in grants and loans, affecting programs such as school meals for low-income students and wildfire preparedness. The Office of Management and Budget has requested details from federal agencies about over 2,600 programs that could be affected.
• White House rescinds spending freeze on federal loans and grants — The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rescinded a policy that temporarily paused federal loans and grants, reversing a decision made earlier in the week. This policy had initially halted funding for various programs, including Medicaid. The rescission followed a federal judge's restraining order against the funding freeze, which was issued due to conflicting messages from the White House. Despite the rescission, the White House press secretary stated that the executive orders on federal funding remain in effect.
• Trump administration memo orders freeze on federal financial assistance — The Trump administration issued a memo directing federal agencies to freeze the disbursement of all federal financial assistance, effective January 30, 2025. The memo, authored by acting OMB Director Matthew J. Vaeth, requires agencies to submit detailed information about their financial assistance programs by February 10, 2025. The freeze will remain until the Office of Management and Budget reviews and approves each program. The memo excludes direct assistance to individuals, such as Social Security and Medicare. The stated purpose is to prevent federal resources from advancing certain policies deemed wasteful by the administration.
• Trump administration rescinds federal funding freeze memo — The Trump administration rescinded a memo that froze federal funding after it caused widespread chaos and legal challenges. The initial freeze had paused federal grants and loans, affecting public programs and government spending.
• Case update — National Council of Nonprofits v. Office of Management and Budget (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00239 — The Government submitted a Notice that the OMB had rescinded the challenged memo. On the same day, the White House Press Secretary stated , “This is not a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. Why? To end any confusion created by the court's injunction. The President's EO's on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”
• Case update — State of New York v. Trump (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00039 — The Government submitted a notice that the OMB had rescinded the challenged memo. On the same day, the White House Press Secretary stated , “This is not a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. Why? To end any confusion created by the court's injunction. The President's EO's on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”
• Trump administration sued over funding freeze — The Trump administration faced a lawsuit from multiple states over a funding freeze memo. Despite rescinding the memo, the administration argued in court for the lawsuit's dismissal. However, a judge ordered the release of funds, citing conflicting statements from the administration's press secretary, which suggested the freeze was still in effect.
• Reports of Medicaid portal outages following funding freeze — Following the Trump administration's memo to freeze federal financial assistance, reports emerged of Medicaid portal outages across all 50 states. Senator Ron Wyden confirmed the outages, describing them as a "blatant attempt to rip away health insurance from millions of Americans." The White House attributed the outages to technical issues, but the Medicaid website cited delays due to executive orders on grant payments. Medicaid provides health insurance to nearly a fifth of all Americans.
• Trump administration freezes federal funding — The Trump administration announced a freeze on all federal funding and grants, claiming it would ensure the removal of "Marxist" diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. This decision affects various programs, including Meals on Wheels and Medicaid, which are essential for many Americans. The Office of Management and Budget later issued a memo to rescind the freeze, but the press secretary contradicted this, indicating the cuts were still in effect. The situation has led to significant public outcry and legal scrutiny.
• Trump issues executive order freezing government grants — Former President Trump issued an executive order freezing government grants, which was described as illegal and a direct assault on congressional authority. The order was rescinded after two days due to public outrage and pressure from lawmakers. The freeze caused significant disruption and uncertainty for millions of Americans dependent on government benefits and payments. The swift public and political response highlighted the power of civic engagement in countering executive overreach.
• Trump’s administration freezes federal grants — The Office of Management and Budget under Trump sent out a memo freezing all federal grants and loans without prior approval from the White House, leading to concerns about a constitutional crisis.
• Court issues injunction against Trump Administration — U.S. District Court Judge Jack McConnell issued an injunction against the Trump Administration, preventing it from impounding federal funds intended for states. The court found that the Executive's pause in disbursement of federal funding would cause irreparable harm to states' ability to provide vital services. The injunction ensures that federal financial assistance to states remains uninterrupted.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of New York v. Trump (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00039 — Judge McConnell issued a temporary restraining order against the OMB policy to allow the states to file their motion for a preliminary injunction. Judge McConnell's order notes that the case is not moot because “the alleged rescission of the OMB Directive was in name only and may have been issued simply to defeat the jurisdiction of the courts.” The judge also wrote, "the States are likely to succeed on the merits of some, if not all, their claims."

Supporting reports

• Trump fires NLRB officials, paralyzing agency — Donald Trump fired National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo and chair Gwynne Wilcox, effectively paralyzing the agency. The firings leave the NLRB with only two members, short of the quorum needed to issue significant decisions on labor disputes. The dismissals have been criticized as an attack on the rule of law and a threat to the independence of regulatory agencies. Wilcox, the first Black woman on the board, plans to challenge her firing in court, which could invalidate future board decisions if her termination is overturned.
• Trump administration fires federal watchdogs — Since January 24, 2025, President Trump has fired a dozen independent federal government watchdogs, including Gwynne Wilcox, a senior official at the National Labor Relations Board. Wilcox described her dismissal as "unprecedented and illegal." These firings are part of Trump's broader agenda to reshape the federal government by reducing its workforce and cutting spending. The removal of these watchdogs has raised concerns about the administration's commitment to oversight and accountability.

Supporting reports

• Trump DOJ fires prosecutors involved in investigations against him — The Department of Justice, under Acting Attorney General McHenry, terminated several career prosecutors who were involved in investigations of former President Trump. This action is framed as part of an effort to end the "weaponization of government" and aligns with Trump's agenda. The firings raise concerns about the independence of the DOJ and its role in upholding the rule of law.
• Trump administration fires DOJ lawyers in criminal cases — The Trump administration fired more than a dozen DOJ lawyers involved in two criminal cases against the president. This action raises concerns about the independence of the Justice Department and potential interference in legal proceedings.
• Trump justice department fires officials linked to Jack Smith — On January 27, 2025, Acting Attorney General James McHenry fired over a dozen federal prosecutors who had worked on criminal cases against Donald Trump. These prosecutors were part of Special Counsel Jack Smith's team, which had charged Trump in two cases related to mishandling classified documents and attempting to overturn the 2020 election results. The firings were justified by McHenry as necessary because the prosecutors could not be trusted to implement the president's agenda. This move is part of broader personnel changes within the Justice Department under the Trump administration.
• Trump fires federal prosecutors involved in his prosecutions — On January 27, Trump’s acting attorney general fired more than a dozen federal prosecutors who were involved in the criminal prosecutions against Trump. The official stated that the acting attorney general “does not trust these officials to assist in faithfully implementing the President’s agenda.”
• White House directed firing of special counsel prosecutors — The Justice Department, following instructions from the White House, fired more than a dozen federal prosecutors involved in criminal prosecutions against Donald Trump. The firings were directed by the acting Attorney General, James McHenry, and were linked to a memo from the White House personnel office. This action has raised concerns about the independence of the Justice Department and its potential use as an extension of the White House. The prosecutors were dismissed due to their roles in prosecuting Trump, which was seen as incompatible with the president's agenda.

Supporting reports

• Trump fires 17 Inspectors General without notice — Former President Donald Trump fired 17 non-partisan, independent Inspectors General at various government agencies without providing the required 30-day notice to Congress. This action violates federal law and has been criticized as a move to eliminate oversight and accountability within the government. The firings have raised concerns about potential corruption and abuse of power in the Trump administration.
• Trump fires multiple inspectors general — President Trump informed at least 15 inspectors general across various federal departments that they were fired, including those from Defense, State, and Health and Human Services. This action follows a recent law requiring presidents to provide written reasons for such removals, raising legal concerns about the firings.
• Trump fired federal inspectors general — Donald Trump dismissed more than a dozen independent federal government watchdogs, including inspectors general at the departments of state, defense, and transportation. This action was taken without providing the required 30 days' notice or reasons to Congress, which is a violation of federal law. The dismissals are seen as an attempt to replace these officials with loyalists, raising concerns about oversight and accountability in the government.
• Trump administration fires federal watchdogs — Since January 24, 2025, President Trump has fired a dozen independent federal government watchdogs, including Gwynne Wilcox, a senior official at the National Labor Relations Board. Wilcox described her dismissal as "unprecedented and illegal." These firings are part of Trump's broader agenda to reshape the federal government by reducing its workforce and cutting spending. The removal of these watchdogs has raised concerns about the administration's commitment to oversight and accountability.
• Trump fires Inspectors General without notice — Senator Chuck Grassley reported that President Trump fired 18 Inspectors General without providing the required 30-day notice to Congress. This action violates legal norms and raises concerns about oversight and accountability within the federal government.

Supporting reports

• White House issued National Security Presidential Memorandum reorganizing NSC structure and governance — The White House issued National Security Presidential Memorandum/NSPM-1 on January 20, 2025, reorganizing the National Security Council and its subordinate committees. The memorandum establishes a unified NSC staff serving both national security and homeland security functions, designates new NSC members (including the Attorney General, Secretary of Interior, White House Chief of Staff, and National Security Advisor), clarifies the roles of the National Security Advisor and Homeland Security Advisor, and restructures the Principals Committee and Deputies Committee with new decision-making and dispute-resolution procedures. The memorandum supersedes all prior NSC organizational directives, including National Security Memorandum–2 of February 4, 2021.
• Trump designates acting cabinet and cabinet-level officials — President Trump issued a presidential action designating 31 individuals to serve as acting heads of cabinet departments and cabinet-level agencies, effective immediately, pending Senate confirmation of permanent appointees. The designations invoke 5 U.S.C. § 3345 et seq. (the Federal Vacancies Reform Act). Acting positions include Secretary of State (Lisa Kenna), Attorney General (James McHenry), Secretary of Defense (Robert Salesses), and heads of EPA, CIA, FBI, and other major agencies.
• Trump designates chairmen and acting chairmen across federal agencies — President Trump issued a presidential action on January 20, 2025, designating chairmen and acting chairmen for 15 federal agencies and commissions, including the FCC (Brendan Carr), FERC (Mark Christie), FTC (Andrew Ferguson), NLRB (Marvin Kaplan), NRC (David Wright), SEC (Mark Uyeda, acting), EEOC (Andrea Lucas, acting), FDIC (Travis Hill, acting), NCUA (Kyle Hauptman), USCCR (Peter Kirsanow), Farm Credit Administration (Jeffrey Hall), Surface Transportation Board (Patrick Fuchs), and Federal Maritime Commission (Louis Sola).
• Trump sends cabinet and cabinet-level nominations to Senate — President Trump sent nominations to the Senate for 23 cabinet and cabinet-level positions on January 20, 2025. The nominations include Scott Bessent for Treasury Secretary, Pamela Bondi for Attorney General, Marco Rubio for Secretary of State, Peter Hegseth for Secretary of Defense, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Secretary of Health and Human Services, and 18 other positions spanning domestic and international agencies. The Senate must confirm each nominee.
• White House announces sub-cabinet nominations to Senate — The White House issued a formal nominations announcement to the Senate on January 20, 2025, naming 47 individuals for sub-cabinet positions across federal agencies. The list includes nominees for Deputy Secretaries, Under Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, agency heads, and other senior executive roles, replacing officials who resigned or whose terms expired. Positions span Defense, Treasury, State, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, Justice, Veterans Affairs, and other departments.
• White House transmits 13 nominations to Senate for sub-cabinet positions — The White House transmitted 13 nominations to the Senate on January 22, 2025, for deputy secretaries, under secretaries, and other sub-cabinet roles across multiple agencies including Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, EPA, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, Interior, Education, SBA, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency. The nominees are identified by name, home state, and the position sought, with most replacing officials who resigned.