Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Rear Admiral questioned legal basis for boat strike — Rear Admiral Donald J. Guter, a retired top judge advocate general for the Navy from 2000 to 2002, questioned the legal basis for the boat strike, noting that if the men on the boat were retreating, there was no "imminent threat" to justify the use of force under the laws of war.

Supporting reports

• Three former FBI agents filed lawsuit against Kash Patel — Three former FBI agents filed a lawsuit against FBI Director Kash Patel portraying him as a "partisan neophyte more interested in social media and swag" than professional law enforcement, occurring on the same day Patel mishandled the Kirk shooting investigation.
• Three former FBI officials sue Kash Patel for wrongful termination over Trump investigations — Three senior FBI officials—Brian Driscoll Jr., Steven Jensen, and Spencer Evans—filed a federal lawsuit in Washington DC against FBI Director Kash Patel and the federal government, alleging wrongful termination and unlawful political influence. The complaint alleges Patel stated he was instructed by the White House to fire agents who worked on Trump investigations, and that Emil Bove pressured officials to compile lists of agents involved in January 6 investigations. The officials seek reinstatement, backpay, and a declaration that their firings were illegal.
• Three former FBI officials sued Patel and DOJ for politicizing the FBI — Three former top officials at the FBI filed a lawsuit against FBI Director Patel, the FBI, Attorney General Bondi, the Department of Justice, and the president, accusing them of unlawfully politicizing the FBI and purging anyone who had ever worked on a criminal investigation of Trump. The lawsuit suggests Bongino had an "intense focus on [using] his social media profiles to change his followers' perceptions of the FBI."
• FBI director and deputy director focused on social media rather than investigation — FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino, both MAGA influencers without law enforcement experience, appeared to prioritize social media activity over the investigation into Kirk's shooting. Hours after the shooting, Patel's personal social media account posted a picture of himself and Kirk; minutes later, Patel's official FBI account posted conflicting updates about the suspect's custody status. Both officials appeared focused more on posting than conducting investigative work.

Supporting reports

• Supreme Court schedules reargument in Louisiana v. Callais on VRA Section 2 remedy — The U.S. Supreme Court delayed issuing an opinion in Louisiana v. Callais during summer 2025 and announced a reargument scheduled for October on whether Louisiana's creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments. The case originated after Louisiana was ordered in 2024 to redraw maps with an additional majority-Black district following a successful Section 2 challenge. The reargument signals the Court may be preparing a sweeping ruling that could substantially narrow or eliminate the VRA's most powerful remaining provision.

Supporting reports

• Supreme Court lifts injunction on ICE roving patrols in Los Angeles — The Supreme Court's conservative majority temporarily lifted a lower court injunction that had restricted "roving" immigration patrols in the Los Angeles area. The lower court had found that federal ICE agents were indiscriminately targeting people based on race, language, employment, or location. The lifting of the injunction allows ICE to resume these patrols without the prior civil rights constraints. Immigration advocates characterized the decision as effectively legalizing racial profiling and warned it could trigger broader erosion of civil rights protections nationwide.
• Supreme Court lifts order barring race-based immigration enforcement — On September 8, 2025, the Supreme Court lifted an order that had previously barred the Trump administration from stopping people solely on the basis of race, language, or job. Immigration advocates expect this ruling will enable further acceleration of deportation raids targeting Southeast Asian communities.
• Supreme Court lifts restraining order on ICE immigration raids in Los Angeles — The U.S. Supreme Court's conservative majority granted a stay against a lower-court restraining order that had barred ICE agents from conducting "roving patrols" in Los Angeles based on race, language, or occupation. U.S. District Judge Maame E. Frimpong had found "mountain of evidence" that enforcement tactics violated the Constitution and amounted to racial profiling. The 6-3 decision allows the Trump administration to resume sweeping immigration operations without the judicial restrictions, marking a major victory for the administration's mass deportation campaign.
• Supreme Court lifts restrictions on immigration patrols in Los Angeles — The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6–3 decision lifting a temporary restraining order that had barred federal immigration agents from stopping people in Los Angeles based on race, ethnicity, language, employment type, or location. Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence cited race as a "relevant factor" in forming reasonable suspicion. The ruling immediately enabled the Department of Homeland Security to resume "roving patrols" across the LA area, where prior sweeps had detained U.S. citizens and separated families. Civil rights advocates and local officials condemned the decision as legalizing racial profiling.
• Supreme Court lifts temporary restraining order on ICE racial profiling in Los Angeles — The U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 to reverse a temporary restraining order that had banned ICE from stopping people based on race, language, or job. U.S. District Judge Maame E Frimpong had granted the order after finding "mountain of evidence" of constitutional violations through racial profiling. Justice Kavanaugh's majority opinion held that ethnicity can be a "relevant" factor in immigration enforcement. ICE immediately resumed sweeping raids in Los Angeles, with the agency announcing it would "flood the zone" in the city.
• Supreme Court ruled racial profiling legal in immigration detentions — The Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that racial profiling is permissible when conducting immigration detentions. Justice Kagan's dissent documented that ICE in Los Angeles was stopping individuals based solely on four factors: race, language spoken or accent, location, and type of work. The District Court had previously ruled such stops constituted illegal racial profiling. The decision applies nationwide. Justice Kagan warned that the ruling undermines Fourth Amendment protections for people based on appearance, accent, or low-wage employment.
• U.S. District Court judge issued order prohibiting race-based immigration stops; Supreme Court enjoined the ruling — On July 11, 2025, a U.S. district court judge issued an order prohibiting federal agents from stopping individuals as potential undocumented immigrants based primarily on apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish, working in agriculture or construction, or combinations thereof. On September 8, 2025, the Supreme Court enjoined that ruling, allowing federal agents to continue targeting people based on perceived race, language, or occupation. Justice Brett Kavanaugh's majority opinion dismissed concerns about Constitutional violations, while Justice Sonya Sotomayor dissented, warning that "constitutional freedoms are lost."
• Supreme Court Grants Stay in Noem v. Perdomo — The Supreme Court granted the federal government's request for a stay in the case of Noem v. Perdomo. This decision allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to continue conducting immigration enforcement actions in Los Angeles, California, without the restrictions imposed by a lower court order. The lower court had previously ruled that the federal government must stop conducting detentive stops without reasonable suspicion. The Supreme Court's decision was made in a 6-3 vote, with Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting.
• Supreme Court paused ruling preventing ICE racial profiling — The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 unexplained decision, paused a lower court ruling preventing federal immigration officials from stopping suspects in Los Angeles based solely on factors like race, occupation, accent, or speaking Spanish. Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, writing that the decision allows "the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job."
• US Supreme Court lifts restrictions on ICE racial profiling in immigration enforcement — The US Supreme Court's conservative majority lifted judicial restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations in Los Angeles, allowing federal agents to stop people if they appear Latino or speak Spanish. Immigration advocates characterized the decision as effectively legalizing racial profiling. The ruling reversed the temporary restraining order that had provided relief to Los Angeles communities and reinstated the government's ability to conduct indiscriminate enforcement operations based on perceived immigration status indicators.
• Supreme Court shadow docket decision permitting racial profiling — The Supreme Court issued a shadow docket decision that allows racial profiling. The decision was characterized as ominous in its implications for civil rights and equal protection. No additional procedural or factual details were provided in the source text regarding the specific case, parties, or scope of the ruling.

Supporting reports

• Federal appeals court temporarily lifted LA National Guard restriction — A federal appeals court temporarily lifted a judge's order restricting the Trump administration's use of National Guard troops in Los Angeles as the president appeals the ruling.