Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• CDC stayed ACIP immunization meeting pending court order in vaccine litigation — The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced cancellation of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meeting scheduled for March 18–19, 2026, pursuant to a preliminary injunction issued March 16, 2026, by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in American Academy of Pediatrics et al. v. Kennedy et al. The stay remains in effect until further court notice. The original meeting notice had been published February 26, 2026.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge blocks RFK Jr's vaccine committee appointments and immunization schedule changes — Federal Judge Brian E Murphy ruled that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr's firing of all 17 ACIP members and replacement with hand-picked advisers likely violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The judge stayed 13 of the new appointments, invalidating their votes and blocking unprecedented January changes to the US immunization schedule, including bans on thimerosal in flu vaccines and the MMR-chickenpox combination vaccine. The ACIP meeting scheduled for later that week was postponed.

Supporting reports

• Trump attacked Supreme Court over tariff ruling and 2020 election certification — President Trump posted on social media attacking the U.S. Supreme Court for declaring his tariffs unconstitutional. Trump blamed the justices for "ruining the nation" by permitting Democrat Joe Biden to be inaugurated rather than "call out The Rigged Presidential Election of 2020."

Supporting reports

• Utah Governor Spencer Cox signs bill expanding state supreme court from five to seven justices — In late January 2026, Utah's Republican-controlled legislature passed legislation adding two seats to the state's supreme court. Governor Spencer Cox quickly signed the bill into law, expanding the court from five to seven justices. Critics argue the move amounts to court-packing aimed at blunting the impact of judicial rulings related to Proposition 4, the anti-gerrymandering law.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge documented immigration agents disregarding judicial directives — A Bush-appointed federal judge compiled nearly one hundred documented instances in which immigration agents disregarded judicial directives within a single month, noting the list was almost certainly incomplete. A separate judge stated publicly that the vast majority of people brought before his court had lawful status. A government attorney was held in civil contempt, and another described arriving with no training and no guidance. Hundreds of agents remain in operation, with on-the-ground observers reporting operations shifting toward communities with less visibility.
• Two American citizens killed during Minnesota immigration enforcement operation — Two American citizens, Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti, have been killed during the immigration enforcement operation in Minnesota. The deaths occurred during months of intensive enforcement operations that have left hundreds of ICE agents operating in the state and families afraid to leave their homes for extended periods.

Supporting reports

• Trump sought Supreme Court rehearing on tariff decision — Trump posted on social media requesting that the Supreme Court reconsider its recent tariff decision, arguing that the ruling "could allow for Hundreds of Billions of Dollars to be returned to Countries and Companies that have been 'ripping off' the USA for many years." Trump asked "Is a Rehearing or Readjudication of this case possible???" Legal experts confirmed that no such rehearing mechanism exists under Supreme Court rules.

Supporting reports

• Federal lawsuit alleges DHS agents labeled observers "domestic terrorists" — Legal nonprofit Protect Democracy filed a federal class-action lawsuit alleging that DHS agents are retaliating against people who lawfully observe and record federal immigration enforcement. The lawsuit references a viral video from Portland, Maine, in which an agent told an observer: "Cause we have a nice little database. And now you're considered a domestic terrorist." DHS denied the database exists but acknowledged it "monitors and investigates" threats. In Minnesota, dozens of people submitted sworn declarations to the ACLU stating federal agents told them filming enforcement operations was illegal or constituted interference.
• Federal judge documented immigration agents disregarding judicial directives — A Bush-appointed federal judge compiled nearly one hundred documented instances in which immigration agents disregarded judicial directives within a single month, noting the list was almost certainly incomplete. A separate judge stated publicly that the vast majority of people brought before his court had lawful status. A government attorney was held in civil contempt, and another described arriving with no training and no guidance. Hundreds of agents remain in operation, with on-the-ground observers reporting operations shifting toward communities with less visibility.
• Legal observers classified using language associated with violent extremism — A new federal lawsuit alleges that legal observers monitoring immigration enforcement operations are being classified using language associated with violent extremism. A former agency attorney testified that officer training was cut by over 40%, including constitutional law and use-of-force instruction.

Supporting reports

• Trump claimed he does not need Congressional approval for tariffs — Fifteen minutes after his threat post, at 9:49 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted that "As President, I do not have to go back to Congress to get approval of Tariffs. It has already been gotten, in many forms, a long time ago!" He claimed tariffs were "reaffirmed by the ridiculous and poorly crafted supreme court decision."
• Trump posted that Supreme Court ruling granted him unchecked tariff power — At 7:06 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted on social media that the Supreme Court had "accidentally and unwittingly" given him "far more powers and strength" than he had before. He claimed he could use tariffs "in a much more powerful and obnoxious way, with legal certainty" and attacked the court with contemptuous language, writing "supreme court (will be using lower case letters for a while based on a complete lack of respect!)."
• Trump threatened higher tariffs against countries "playing games" — At 9:34 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted a threat that any country wanting to "play games" with the Supreme Court decision, especially those that have "ripped off" the U.S., would face "much higher Tariff, and worse" than recently agreed tariffs. The post ended with "BUYER BEWARE!!!"
• House Speaker Johnson acknowledged Congress lacks appetite for Trump's tariffs — House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) told reporters on February 24, 2026, that Congress has no appetite for levying the tariffs Trump and his MAGA supporters want. Johnson stated: "It's going to be, I think, a challenge to find consensus on any path forward on the tariffs, on the legislative side. And so that is why, I think, you see so much of the attention on the executive side, the executive branch, and what they're doing and how they're reacting to the ruling."

Supporting reports

• Judge Aileen Cannon blocked release of Special Counsel Jack Smith's classified documents report — U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon issued an order permanently blocking the release of Volume Two of Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on classified documents. Cannon ruled that releasing the report would be "unfair" to Trump and his co-defendants, citing her prior conclusion that the Special Counsel lacked lawful authority. The Department of Justice did not oppose the motion, allowing Cannon to write that "all parties agree" disclosure would violate the court's dismissal order. The decision shields the report from public scrutiny.
• Judge Cannon permanently blocks release of Jack Smith's classified documents report — US District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, issued a permanent injunction barring the Department of Justice from releasing Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on the classified documents case (Volume II). Cannon condemned Smith's compilation of the report after she had dismissed the underlying case in 2024 on grounds of unlawful appointment, calling it a "brazen stratagem" and a breach of her dismissal order. She ruled that release would expose grand jury material and cause irreparable harm to Trump, distinguishing the case from prior special counsel reports (Mueller) that were publicly released.
• Judge Aileen Cannon blocked release of Jack Smith's classified documents report — Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, blocked the release of Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on his investigation of Trump's retention of classified documents after leaving office in 2021. It is standard procedure for a special counsel's report to be made public. Legal analyst Joyce White Vance noted that Cannon has consistently worked to suppress Smith's report and that Trump's fierce fight to keep it under wraps has led to speculation about surprising contents.
• Judge blocks release of Jack Smith’s report on Trump — Judge Aileen Cannon blocked the release of special counsel Jack Smith's report regarding Trump's retention of classified documents. This decision is notable as it deviates from the usual procedure of making such reports public, raising concerns about transparency and accountability.

Supporting reports

• Trump announces 10% global baseline tariff under Section 122 of Trade Act — Following the Supreme Court's ruling striking down his IEEPA-based tariffs, President Trump announced a new 10% global baseline tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which permits tariffs for 150 days. Trump stated the administration would initiate investigations into unfair trading practices that could lead to permanent tariffs. Trump framed the court's decision as actually strengthening presidential tariff authority and vowed to enact "very powerful alternatives" to the struck-down tariffs.
• Trump announces 10% global tariff under Section 122 — Following the Supreme Court's invalidation of his national emergency tariffs, Trump announced a 10% blanket global tariff "over and above our normal tariffs already being charged" under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which permits temporary tariffs to address balance-of-payments deficits. This action circumvents the Court's ruling by invoking alternative statutory authority, though Section 122 requires congressional approval to extend beyond 150 days and prohibits country-specific discrimination.
• Trump announces new 10% global tariff under Trade Act of 1974 — Hours after the Supreme Court ruling, President Trump held a press conference announcing he would continue his tariff war using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 instead of the IEEPA. He announced a new 10% global tariff and directed his administration to conduct investigations into unfair trading practices under other sections of the 1974 Act. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated the new tariffs would result in "virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026" and acknowledged the process would be more complicated but ultimately achieve the same outcome.
• Trump announces new 10% global tariff, increases to 15% within 24 hours — After the Supreme Court ruled his tariffs unconstitutional, President Trump announced a new 10% global tariff using different statutory authority and increased it to 15% less than 24 hours later. Trump stated "The policy hasn't changed. The legal tools that implement that may change but the policy hasn't changed," signaling intent to circumvent the court's constitutional ruling through alternative legal mechanisms. Top trade negotiator Jamieson Greer defended the shift as providing US business "leverage" in world trade.
• Trump signals intent to reimpose tariffs via alternative legal authority — At a news conference on 21 February 2026, President Trump stated he would attempt to reintroduce 10 percent tariffs on all countries using a different legal mechanism after the Supreme Court struck down his IEEPA-based tariffs. Trump characterized the court's failure to address refunds as "crazy" and predicted years of litigation. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent similarly suggested refunds could be delayed indefinitely.
• Trump announced 10% tariff on foreign imports following Supreme Court ruling — On Friday, February 21, 2026, immediately after the Supreme Court's decision striking down his IEEPA tariffs, Trump announced he was imposing a 10% tariff on foreign imports, directly contradicting the court's constitutional finding.
• Supreme Court ruled Trump's tariff regime unlawful; Trump announced new tariffs under Section 122 of Trade Act — The Supreme Court struck down Trump's sweeping tariff regime as lacking statutory authority. Within hours, Trump announced a new 10 percent worldwide tariff, raising it to 15 percent by the following morning, claiming authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. Legal analysis indicates Section 122 permits only temporary import surcharges of up to 15 percent for no more than 150 days, and only when the United States faces a serious international balance-of-payments crisis. The current U.S. balance-of-payments deficit is zero, and no such crisis exists. Trump's new tariff announcement appears to be an attempt to circumvent the Court's ruling through a different legal theory.
• Supreme Court rules Trump tariffs illegal under emergency powers law — The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling on Friday declaring that most of Trump's tariffs lacked legal justification under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court held that tariff authority belongs to Congress during peacetime, not the president. Trump responded by announcing a 15% global tariff under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act. Trade chief Jamieson Greer stated the administration would persist with tariff policy despite the ruling and would not seek congressional authorization for the new tariffs.
• Trump signs global 10% tariff proclamation under Section 122 after Supreme Court blocks tariff authority — President Trump signed a proclamation on February 21, 2026, imposing a temporary 10% tariff on all countries effective February 24, invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The action followed a Supreme Court ruling blocking his use of tariffs. Trump claimed authority under existing statutes without congressional approval. Canada, Mexico, certain food products, and critical minerals were exempted. Trump publicly attacked six justices as a "disgrace to the nation" while praising three dissenters.
• Trump increased proposed global tariff rate from 10% to 15% via social media post — Trump announced via Truth Social that he was raising worldwide tariffs from the initially announced 10% to 15%, invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The announcement claimed the tariffs would take effect "effective immediately," though it remained unclear whether official documents had been signed. This followed Trump's earlier press conference announcement of 10% tariffs and came after the Supreme Court struck down his previous tariff actions as illegal on Friday.
• Trump imposed 10% global tariff under Section 122 of Trade Act of 1974, then raised it to 15% — On February 21, 2026, President Trump announced a 10% global tariff citing Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, then raised it to 15% the following day. Trump invoked this authority immediately after the Supreme Court struck down his previous tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. According to Popular Information's analysis, Trump's invocation of Section 122 is legally defective because the statute authorizes tariffs only in response to "large and serious" balance-of-payments deficits, not trade deficits; the U.S. currently has a zero balance-of-payments deficit, making the tariff legally unsupported.
• Trump announces 15% global tariff under alternative legal framework — Following the Supreme Court's ruling, Trump announced a 15% global tariff on all foreign imports (increased from 10% announced Friday) under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, a different legal framework than the one struck down by the court. Trade chief Greer indicated the administration would not automatically seek congressional authorization for these tariffs, which are set to expire within five months without it.
• Trump escalated tariffs to 15% and claimed court ruling expanded his powers — On Saturday, February 22, 2026, Trump posted that he was raising tariffs from 10% to 15% worldwide, effective immediately. He claimed the Supreme Court's decision "accidentally and unwittingly" gave him "far more powers and strength" than before and that he could "do absolutely 'terrible' things to foreign countries" using tariffs the court had approved.
• Trump administration announced plans to scale back tariffs on steel and aluminum — The Trump administration announced it would review and scale back tariffs on steel and aluminum goods—which had been set at up to 50 percent the previous summer—and exempt some items while halting expansion of the tariff lists. The administration also planned to launch more targeted national security probes into specific goods instead of maintaining broad tariffs. This move was undertaken in response to an affordability crisis damaging Trump's approval ratings.
• Trump invoked Section 122 authority to impose 10% tariff on all imports — Following the Supreme Court's IEEPA ruling, Trump immediately invoked Section 122 of the Tariff Act—an older statutory authority requiring no investigation but limited to 15 percent for 150 days—to impose a 10 percent tariff on all imports from all countries. This action circumvented the Court's restriction on unilateral IEEPA tariffs by relying on a different legal basis Congress had previously authorized.
• Trump raised Section 122 tariff from 10% to 15% — One day after imposing a 10 percent tariff under Section 122, Trump raised the rate to 15 percent—the statutory maximum under that authority. This escalation occurred within the same legal framework but pushed the temporary tariff to its ceiling.
• Trump imposed 15% tariff invoking Section 122 of Trade Act of 1974 — President Trump announced a 15% tariff by invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, days after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his prior tariff regime as unconstitutional. The administration's trade representative Jamieson Greer defended the move on Sunday shows, claiming the legal tool might change but policy remains consistent. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declined to commit to refunding approximately $134 billion collected under the now-invalidated tariffs, stating only that the administration would follow the court's direction.
• Administration announces pipeline of tariff investigations to rebuild tariff wall — Treasury Secretary Bessent announced on Sunday that Section 122 tariffs could expire after five months as Section 301 investigations into unfair trade practices and additional Section 232 national security tariffs are lined up to replace them. The administration is using procedural investigations as a mechanism to rebuild the same tariff structure that the Supreme Court struck down, using different legal authorities.
• Trade chief states tariff policy unchanged despite court ruling — On Sunday, U.S. trade negotiator Jamieson Greer told ABC News that the Trump administration would maintain its tariff policy and continue in the same direction, stating "the policy hasn't changed. The legal tools that implement that may change but the policy hasn't changed." Greer also confirmed the U.S. would not back out of bilateral tariff deals with the UK, EU, Japan, Switzerland, and others, despite the court ruling declaring those tariffs illegal.
• Trump delivered longest State of the Union address on record during partial DHS shutdown — President Trump delivered what multiple news outlets reported as the longest State of the Union address in U.S. history on February 24, 2026, while the Department of Homeland Security remained partially shut down since February 14. The address occurred during an active government funding lapse affecting federal workers' paychecks and DHS operations including TSA PreCheck, Global Entry, border security, airport screening, and the Coast Guard. Federal News Network reported it was the first SOTU ever delivered during an active partial government shutdown.
• Trump vowed to continue imposing tariffs despite Supreme Court ruling — During the State of the Union address, President Trump responded to the Supreme Court's striking down of his tariff authority by calling the ruling "unfortunate" and vowing to pursue "alternative" legal authorities to continue imposing tariffs without congressional approval. He also repeated the claim that tariffs are paid by foreign countries, contrary to evidence showing costs are borne primarily by American importers and consumers.
• Trump claimed he does not need Congressional approval for tariffs — Fifteen minutes after his threat post, at 9:49 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted that "As President, I do not have to go back to Congress to get approval of Tariffs. It has already been gotten, in many forms, a long time ago!" He claimed tariffs were "reaffirmed by the ridiculous and poorly crafted supreme court decision."
• Trump claims he has unchecked power after Supreme Court ruling — Trump publicly stated that the Supreme Court's ruling has given him "far more powers and strength" than before, suggesting he could use tariffs in a more aggressive manner. His comments reflect a disregard for the Court's authority and the principles of checks and balances.
• Trump posted that Supreme Court ruling granted him unchecked tariff power — At 7:06 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted on social media that the Supreme Court had "accidentally and unwittingly" given him "far more powers and strength" than he had before. He claimed he could use tariffs "in a much more powerful and obnoxious way, with legal certainty" and attacked the court with contemptuous language, writing "supreme court (will be using lower case letters for a while based on a complete lack of respect!)."
• Trump threatened higher tariffs against countries "playing games" — At 9:34 a.m. on February 24, 2026, Trump posted a threat that any country wanting to "play games" with the Supreme Court decision, especially those that have "ripped off" the U.S., would face "much higher Tariff, and worse" than recently agreed tariffs. The post ended with "BUYER BEWARE!!!"
• Trump threatens higher tariffs on foreign countries — Following the Supreme Court's ruling, Trump threatened that any country that "plays games" with the decision would face significantly higher tariffs. He asserted that he does not need Congressional approval for tariffs, claiming that previous approvals were sufficient. This statement reflects his intention to bypass legislative oversight in tariff implementation.
• Trump announced but did not sign 15 percent global tariff order — Trump announced plans to raise global tariffs to 15 percent under the 1974 Trade Act after his IEEPA tariffs were struck down by the Supreme Court. However, he never actually signed the order, meaning the effective tariff rate remained at 10 percent. The announcement was made publicly or on social media but was not formalized through executive action.
• Trump proclaims 10% temporary import surcharge on most goods for 150 days to address balance-of-payments deficit — President Trump issued Proclamation 11012 on February 20, 2026, imposing a temporary 10 percent ad valorem import surcharge effective February 24, 2026, for 150 days under section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The proclamation cites large U.S. balance-of-payments deficits ($1.2 trillion goods trade deficit in 2024, current account deficit of 4.0% of GDP, and negative net international-investment position of -90% of GDP) as justification. Broad exemptions apply to critical minerals, energy, agricultural products, pharmaceuticals, vehicles, aerospace goods, and articles from Canada, Mexico, and Central American trade partners. The surcharge is in addition to existing tariffs and will be administered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
• Trump administration imposes 10% global tariff after Supreme Court strikes down "liberation day" tariffs — Following a Supreme Court decision that struck down Trump's sweeping "liberation day" tariffs imposed the previous year, the Trump administration announced a 10% global tariff on imported articles from every country for 150 days, effective Tuesday. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated the rate would rise to 15% or higher for some countries. The move represents a recalibration of tariff policy in response to the court's rejection of the earlier tariff regime.
• Trump sought Supreme Court rehearing on tariff decision — Trump posted on social media requesting that the Supreme Court reconsider its recent tariff decision, arguing that the ruling "could allow for Hundreds of Billions of Dollars to be returned to Countries and Companies that have been 'ripping off' the USA for many years." Trump asked "Is a Rehearing or Readjudication of this case possible???" Legal experts confirmed that no such rehearing mechanism exists under Supreme Court rules.

Supporting reports

• Trump attacks Supreme Court justices by name and threatens future retaliation — During a White House press briefing on February 21, 2026, Trump publicly denounced six Supreme Court justices who voted against his tariff authority, calling them a "disgrace to the nation" and "unpatriotic." He praised the three dissenters (Kavanaugh, Thomas, Alito) and attacked two of his own appointees, Barrett and Gorsuch, describing them as "an embarrassment to their families" and suggesting they would be excluded from the State of the Union. Trump alleged without evidence that the court had been "swayed by foreign interests."

Supporting reports

• President attacks justices and invokes Section 122 tariff authority — Within hours of the Supreme Court's ruling, the President issued a proclamation under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 imposing a 10% temporary import surcharge on virtually all imports, effective February 24, then raised it to 15% by Saturday. The President publicly attacked the justices who ruled against him, calling them "fools and lapdogs," praised the three dissenters by name, and alleged foreign influence over the Court. Treasury Secretary Bessent announced the goal is to achieve the same tariff posture through different legal channels with revenue "virtually unchanged."
• Trump responds to tariff ruling with public criticism of justices and announces new tariff order — After learning of the Supreme Court's tariff decision, Trump publicly attacked the justices in the majority, including two he appointed, calling them "fools," "lapdogs," and "unpatriotic." He claimed the Court had been "swayed by foreign interests" and that "obnoxious, ignorant and loud" people had frightened the justices. Trump then announced he would sign an order imposing a 10% global tariff under a different law permitting such action for 150 days, stating he had "the right to do tariffs" and did not need to work with Congress. That evening, he posted on social media confirming he had signed the order, effective "almost immediately."
• Trump held emergency press conference attacking Supreme Court justices — Trump held an unhinged emergency press conference after learning of the tariff ruling during a breakfast meeting with governors. He called the decision a "disgrace," attacked Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett as "fools and lapdogs for the RINOs," and claimed they were "disloyal to our Constitution." Trump alleged without evidence that foreign interests had "undue influence" over the Supreme Court and suggested Democrats should pack the court with 21 justices. He refused to commit to honoring potential refunds of $175 billion in tariffs already collected and claimed he had authority to "destroy the country" through trade actions.
• Trump's angry outburst after tariff ruling — After learning of the Supreme Court's tariff decision during a meeting with governors, Trump abruptly cleared the press from the room and engaged in an angry outburst. Witnesses reported him repeatedly attacking the courts and screaming profanities. Later, in a press conference, Trump called the justices "a disgrace to our nation," "fools," "lapdogs," and "very unpatriotic," with his remarks becoming increasingly unhinged.
• Trump attacked Supreme Court justices and announced plan to circumvent tariff ruling — Following the Supreme Court's decision blocking his emergency tariff authority, President Trump called the justices who ruled against him "very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution," suggested without evidence that they are being swayed by "foreign interests," and announced he will impose a 10% "global tariff" under a different statute—the International Emergency Economic Powers Act—which limits tariffs to 150 days unless authorized by Congress.
• Trump attacked Supreme Court Justices over IEEPA tariff ruling — After learning of the Supreme Court's IEEPA ruling, Trump publicly attacked the three conservative Justices who voted against him, calling them "fools and lapdogs for the RINOs and the radical left Democrats" and accusing them of being "unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution." He also claimed the Court had been "swayed by foreign interests." These statements constituted a direct assault on the judicial branch's independence and legitimacy.
• President attacks Supreme Court justices by name — The President publicly denounced the six justices who voted to strike down the IEEPA tariffs, calling them "fools and lapdogs," alleged that foreign interests had undue influence over the Court, and praised the three dissenters by name. This public attack on the judiciary followed immediately after the ruling.

Supporting reports

• DHS memo authorizes ICE detention of legal refugees for "rescreening" — The Department of Homeland Security issued a memo authorizing Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest and indefinitely detain legal refugees already admitted to the US who have not yet obtained permanent residence (green cards), subjecting them to intensive interviews and background checks while in custody. The policy reverses a 2010 Obama-era guidance and directly contradicts a federal judge's recent order blocking such arrests in Minnesota. The memo claims conditional admission and mandatory one-year review compel detention authority.

Supporting reports

• Judge Provinzino held government attorney in civil contempt — U.S. District Judge Laura Provinzino held a military lawyer on special assignment with the Department of Justice in civil contempt for failing to comply with her court order in a habeas case. ICE had released a detainee in Texas without returning identification documents, including a Minnesota driver's license and Mexican consular ID. The attorney acknowledged the office was overwhelmed and "the ball was dropped." The contempt finding carried a $500-per-day enforcement mechanism until compliance, which was lifted after documents were returned.
• U.S. Attorney called contempt ruling "lawless abuse of judicial power" — Following Judge Provinzino's contempt finding against a government attorney, the U.S. Attorney's office responded by characterizing the ruling as "a lawless abuse of judicial power," representing an executive branch rejection of judicial authority and enforcement mechanisms.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge orders National Park Service to restore slavery exhibit at Philadelphia historic site — On February 17, 2026, U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe issued a preliminary injunction ordering the National Park Service to reinstall a slavery exhibit at Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia. The exhibit had been dismantled the previous month in response to Trump administration claims of "anti-American ideology" at cultural institutions. Philadelphia had sued the Department of the Interior, and Judge Rufe granted the city's request to temporarily block the removal and restore the exhibit pending litigation, citing constitutional concerns about executive power to unilaterally alter historical records.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — City of Philadelphia v. Burgum (E.D. Pa.) 2:26-cv-00434 — Judge Rufe granted a preliminary injunction , ordering Defendants to restore the President's House to its physical status as of Jan. 21, 2026 by “reinstall[ing] all panels, displays, and video exhibits that were previously in place” and “prevent[ing] any additions, removals, destruction, or further changes of any kind to the President's House site” without mutual agreement of the City of Philadelphia or until further court order.
• Appeal filed — City of Philadelphia v. Burgum (E.D. Pa.) 2:26-cv-00434 — Defendants appealed the court's Feb. 16, 2026 memorandum opinion and order to the Third Circuit, Case No. 26-1348 .
• Stay pending appeal decided — City of Philadelphia v. Burgum (E.D. Pa.) 2:26-cv-00434 — Judge Hardiman of the Third Circuit stayed the district court's preliminary injunction ordering Defendants to restore the President's House Site to its physical status as of Jan. 21, 2026 and to provide immediate and proper maintenance of the site. Judge Hardiman denied Defendants' request for an administrative stay of the portion of the preliminary injunction enjoining Defendants from taking any action to damage or change the site and ordered Defendants to preserve the status quo as of the entry of his order. Judge Hardiman referred the request for a stay pending resolution of the appeal to a full three-judge motions panel.
• — Judge Rufe denied Defendants' emergency motion for an immediate administrative stay and a stay pending appeal.

Supporting reports

• Immigration judges fired without cause under Trump's second term — Approximately 100 of 735 immigration judges nationwide have been fired without cause since Trump's second term began in 2025, including judges with low asylum grant rates. The Justice Department is actively recruiting replacements and has made clear through recruiting materials that "conscientious adjudication of asylum claims is no longer the point," explicitly advertising positions as "deportation judge" roles focused on maximizing deportations rather than fair adjudication.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge reverses Trump's freeze on Gateway Project rail funding — US District Judge Jeannette Vargas in New York issued a temporary ruling on Friday reversing a Trump administration freeze on $16 billion in federal funds for the Gateway Project, a critical rail infrastructure initiative connecting New York and New Jersey. The freeze, imposed on 30 September pending a compliance review, had halted work on a new Hudson River tunnel and repairs to a century-old tunnel serving 200,000+ daily travelers. Vargas found the states likely to succeed in claims that the freeze was arbitrary and violated legal procedures. Reports indicate Trump demanded renaming Washington Dulles airport and Penn Station after himself in exchange for unfreezing funds.
• Trump administration appealed court order requiring release of Hudson Tunnel funding — The Trump administration appealed a court order requiring it to release federal funding for the Hudson Tunnel project. Prior reporting indicated Trump had offered to unfreeze funds if Democrats agreed to rename major transit hubs after him. The dispute centers on whether infrastructure funds are administered through law and oversight or through personal glorification demands, raising questions about the distinction between state administration and personal brand leverage.
• Motion granted — New Jersey v. Department of Transportation (S.D.N.Y.) 1:26-cv-00939 — Judge Vargas denied Defendants' motion for a stay of the court's TRO pending appeal but granted sua sponte a short administrative stay to allow Defendants to seek a stay from the Second Circuit.
• Trump administration appealed court order on Hudson Tunnel funding conditions — The Trump administration appealed a court order requiring the release of Hudson Tunnel funding after reports surfaced that the funds were offered conditionally contingent on renaming transit hubs after Trump. The appeal contests judicial oversight of the administration's use of federal infrastructure funds.

Supporting reports

• FBI seizes 2020 ballots and election materials in Fulton County, Georgia — The FBI seized 2020 ballots and election materials in Fulton County, Georgia, described as "the top target of Trump's multi-year, conspiracy theory-fueled campaign against the 2020 presidential election." The operation involved Tulsi Gabbard, the U.S. intelligence director, who is leading the Trump administration's effort to re-examine the 2020 election based on claims it was stolen due to alleged foreign government interference.
• FBI raided Fulton County election office and seized 2020 ballots — The FBI raided an election office in Fulton County, Georgia, and seized ballots from the 2020 election. The raid occurred less than one week before Trump's public statements encouraging federal takeover of state elections.
• Court documents reveal FBI Fulton County raid based on debunked 2020 fraud claims — Unsealed court documents show that the FBI raid on a Fulton County, Georgia warehouse that seized 700 boxes of ballots and election-related materials was based on debunked claims of 2020 election fraud from election deniers. The search warrant affidavit was submitted by Kurt Olsen, a lawyer who worked with Trump to overturn the 2020 election and whom Trump recently appointed director of election security and integrity. Olsen recycled numerous debunked fraud theories in the affidavit. Legal analysis indicates the statute of limitations has likely expired on any potential election crimes, and both the Republican-led Georgia General Assembly and State Election Board found no intentional fraud or misconduct in Fulton County's 2020 ballot counting.

Supporting reports

• DOJ attorney expressed frustration in federal court over ICE non-compliance with court orders — In federal court before Judge Jerry Blackwell, DOJ attorney Julie Le stated "The system sucks, this job sucks" while defending the Trump administration's conduct and explaining why numerous court orders were being ignored by ICE and the Trump administration. Le asked to be held in contempt of court to obtain 24 hours of sleep, indicating severe stress and systemic dysfunction in the government's legal defense posture.

Supporting reports

• Judge denies Minnesota's request to end ICE surge in Minneapolis — A federal judge denied Minnesota's legal request to halt or limit the ICE surge in Minneapolis. The state sought judicial intervention to stop the federal enforcement operations, but the court declined to grant relief, allowing the deportation campaign to continue unimpeded by state-level legal challenge.

Supporting reports

• Federal magistrate judge previously rejected arrest warrant for Don Lemon — A federal magistrate judge took the unusual step of declining to sign off on an arrest warrant for Don Lemon, finding there was "no evidence" of criminal behavior in his journalistic work at the Minnesota church protest. The decision reportedly enraged Attorney General Pam Bondi. Despite this judicial rejection, the DOJ proceeded to arrest and charge Lemon anyway.
• Don Lemon Arrested for Violating FACE Act — Federal agents arrested independent journalist Don Lemon in Minneapolis, charging him with violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act and conspiring to hurt the exercise of rights. The charges stem from Lemon's filming of a protest at a church service. Previous attempts by federal prosecutors to charge him were blocked by a magistrate judge and a federal judge. The administration's actions are seen as an attempt to intimidate independent journalists and suppress coverage of federal authority.
• Don Lemon arrested; Trump had made 10 posts attacking him — Don Lemon was arrested. Deputy AG Todd Blanche claimed the president had "never even thought of Don Lemon" when asked if the arrest was intended to make an example of someone the president had sparred with. However, a search of Trump's Truth Social account revealed Trump made 10 nasty posts about Lemon over the past three years, with several recent posts calling him a "sleazebag."

Supporting reports

• Federal judge blocks Trump administration from detaining lawfully resettled refugees in Minnesota — US District Judge John R Tunheim issued a temporary restraining order halting the Trump administration's arrest and detention of lawfully resettled refugees in Minnesota, following a class-action lawsuit. The ruling mandated immediate release of all detained refugees in Minnesota and release of those transferred to Texas within five days. The detentions occurred under "Operation Parris," a DHS "re-vetting" initiative targeting 5,600 resettled refugees who had not yet become permanent residents. More than 100 refugees had been arrested in recent weeks, some flown to detention centers in Texas and released without resources to return home.
• Temporary restraining order ruling — U.H.A. et al v. Bondi et al (D. Minn.) 0:26-cv-00417 — Judge Tunheim granted Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order of Operation PARRIS , enjoining the administration from arresting or detaining a putative class of Minnesota refugees who have not yet adjusted to lawful permanent resident status and have not been charged with any ground for removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act solely on the basis of their status. He also ordered refugees detained on these grounds be immediately released.

Supporting reports

• Federal judge summons ICE acting head Todd Lyons to court for alleged defiance of court orders — Minnesota's top federal judge summoned Todd Lyons, the acting head of ICE, to appear in court on Friday for allegedly defying court orders. The judge stated "The court's patience is at an end," signaling potential contempt of court proceedings against the ICE leader for failing to comply with judicial directives.
• Minnesota federal judge summons ICE acting director for contempt over defiance of court orders — Chief US District Judge Patrick Schiltz issued a three-page order summoning acting ICE director Todd Lyons to appear before him on Friday, warning of potential contempt charges. Schiltz accused the Trump administration of deliberately delaying or ignoring judicial directives across Minnesota's federal courts during "Operation Metro Surge," an aggressive immigration enforcement campaign. The judge cited a specific case in which he had ordered a man released on January 15 who remained in custody as of Monday night, and noted that detained immigrants had been sent to Texas or released far from home without means to return, causing "significant hardship."
• Multiple Minnesota federal judges weigh legal challenges to Operation Metro Surge immigration enforcement — Several Minnesota federal judges are considering broader legal challenges that could significantly restrict federal immigration enforcement in the state or halt Operation Metro Surge entirely. US District Judge Michael Davis accused the administration of attempting to "defy court orders" and "deny noncitizens their due process rights." Judge Kate Menendez ordered government lawyers to respond by Wednesday evening to claims the operation was designed to punish Minnesota for its sanctuary policies. Another federal judge is weighing whether the deployment of 3,000 immigration agents constitutes an unconstitutional occupation, a case that gained momentum following the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal officers.
• Federal judge orders ICE director to appear in court and threatens contempt — Minnesota's chief federal judge, U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz (appointed by President Bush), ordered the head of ICE, Todd Lyons, to appear in his courtroom on Friday and threatened to hold him in contempt for repeated defiance of judges' orders in the state. Judge Schiltz stated "The court's patience is at an end." The order came in response to the Trump administration's massive immigration enforcement action in the Twin Cities, which has flooded courts with emergency lawsuits. Schiltz noted that the administration has been slow-walking or outright defying directives of many Minnesota judges, including at least one of his own orders for release that was not complied with.
• Federal judge orders ICE director to appear in court for contempt of court — Judge Patrick J. Schiltz of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota ordered Todd Lyons, the acting director of ICE, to appear in court on Friday to explain why he was not in contempt of court after ICE officials apparently ignored Schiltz's order to permit a detainee to have a bond hearing or be released. On Tuesday, the government released the detainee. On Wednesday, Schiltz canceled the Friday hearing but identified "96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases" and warned that he would haul Lyons or other government officials into court if they continued ignoring court rulings.
• Minnesota federal judge issues scathing order documenting 96 ICE court order violations — Minnesota's Chief Federal Judge Schiltz issued an order that included an appendix identifying 96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases. The judge stated: "This list should give pause to anyone—no matter his or her political beliefs—who cares about the rule of law. ICE has likely violated more court orders in Jan 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence."

Supporting reports

• US District Judge Kate Menendez heard lawsuit challenging federal immigration surge in Minnesota — US District Judge Kate Menendez heard a lawsuit seeking to halt the federal immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota, with lawyers for the state arguing that the operation violates the 10th Amendment by coercing state compliance with federal demands. The judge repeatedly cited Trump's social media threats of "a day of reckoning and retribution" against Minnesota and Attorney General Pam Bondi's letter to Governor Walz (described by state lawyers as a "shakedown" and "ransom note") as evidence that the operation may be intended to strongarm state officials rather than solely enforce immigration law. The judge declined to rule immediately.
• Federal judge hears arguments on ending ICE surge in Minneapolis — A federal judge heard arguments on Monday regarding whether to end the federal officer surge in Minneapolis known as Operation Metro Surge. No ruling was expected imminently. The hearing follows the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti and represents judicial review of the legality and scope of the federal immigration enforcement deployment.
• Minneapolis federal court hears constitutional challenge to Trump's "Operation Metro Surge" ICE deployment — A federal court in Minneapolis heard arguments on whether the Trump administration's deployment of 3,000 ICE agents to Minnesota violates the 10th Amendment by functioning as an illegal occupation of the state. Judge Kate Menendez ordered the Trump administration to respond to claims that Operation Metro Surge was designed to punish sanctuary jurisdictions. The case was filed after a fatal shooting of a Minneapolis nurse by federal agents and involves allegations that the surge uses coercion and racial profiling to force policy changes unrelated to immigration enforcement.
• Federal judge denies Minnesota's request to halt ICE Operation Metro Surge in Minneapolis — Minnesota's state government, along with Minneapolis and St Paul, sued to end the Trump administration's Operation Metro Surge after ICE agents killed two people—Renee Good and Alex Pretti—sparking weeks of protests. The plaintiffs argued the operation violated the 10th Amendment by exceeding federal authority. On Saturday, federal judge Kate Menendez denied the request, ruling the state failed to demonstrate a constitutional violation, though she acknowledged the operation's "profound and heartbreaking" impact and evidence of racial profiling and excessive force by ICE and CBP agents.

Supporting reports

• The chief federal judge in Minneapolis district court criticized DOJ for a "frivolous" attempt to increase arrests of anti-ICE demonstrators and noted the court docket had been inundated with cases of illegal ICE detentions. — The chief federal judge in Minneapolis district court stated that the court's docket had been inundated with cases of "illegal detentions" by ICE and criticized the Department of Justice for a "frivolous" attempt to increase arrests of anti-ICE demonstrators who disrupted a St. Paul church service. The judge's comments reflect concerns about the volume and legality of ICE enforcement actions in the district.