Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Federal search of Ilhan Omar's home and seizure of property — Federal agents conducted a search of U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar's home and seized property, including her phone, as part of a criminal investigation into her immigration paperwork. Omar's attorneys filed a letter with the Department of Justice contending the search was "neither justified nor lawful" and demanding return of seized items and preservation of search recordings. The investigation was launched weeks before the November 3 midterm election in which Omar is a candidate. A DOJ spokesperson denied the allegations, stating agents complied with all court orders.

Supporting reports

• DOJ civil rights division announces investigation into Brooklyn coffee shop for alleged discrimination — Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon announced that the U.S. Department of Justice's civil rights division is investigating Poetica Coffee in Brooklyn after the cafe posted a social media message criticizing Democratic Representative Dan Goldman over his pro-Israel views and banned him from the establishment. The cafe later deleted the post and refunded Goldman's purchase. Dhillon stated that federal law prohibits public accommodations from discriminating based on race, religion, or national origin, and said the DOJ would consider enforcement action if warranted.

Supporting reports

• DOJ filed criminal conspiracy charges against 15 Minneapolis anti-ICE protesters — The Department of Justice filed charges against 15 Minneapolis protesters, alleging a "conspiracy" to "impede" US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. The 94-page indictment alleges a vast conspiracy to organize against ICE but contains no allegations of injuries to specific ICE officers and no charges of serious violence. The case centers on Direct Action Minnesota, a loose coalition of organizers, and alleges connections between the defendants and major organizations including AFL-CIO, SEIU, DSA, and SURJ, none of which have been charged.

Supporting reports

• Kash Patel sued The Atlantic and journalist Sarah Fitzpatrick for defamation — FBI Director Kash Patel filed a defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic magazine and journalist Sarah Fitzpatrick, seeking $250 million in damages over Fitzpatrick's April 17 article detailing Patel's drinking and inability to perform his job. The Atlantic and Fitzpatrick stood by the story, which was sourced from two dozen sources, and Fitzpatrick reported that additional informants came forward after publication to corroborate her findings.
• Kash Patel files $250 million defamation lawsuit against the Atlantic and reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick — Kash Patel filed a lawsuit in US District Court for the District of Columbia against the Atlantic magazine and reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick, seeking $250 million in damages. Patel's attorneys characterized the Atlantic's reporting on his alleged excessive alcohol consumption and whiskey bottle distribution as "a sweeping, malicious and defamatory hit piece." This lawsuit follows an earlier Atlantic report alleging Patel's excessive drinking and claims that security personnel struggled to wake him on multiple occasions.
• Kash Patel filed defamation suit against The Atlantic and journalist Sarah Fitzpatrick — FBI Director Kash Patel filed a defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic magazine and journalist Sarah Fitzpatrick in response to her article reporting that FBI personnel were alarmed by what they said was erratic behavior and excessive drinking by Patel. Fitzpatrick's story included reporting that Patel was known to drink to the point of intoxication and that on occasion his security detail had trouble waking him in the morning. Patel has denied the allegations.

Supporting reports

• Trump's EEOC sued the New York Times over hiring practices — Trump's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued the New York Times, alleging the publication engaged in "unlawful employment practices" and discriminated against a white man after he was passed over for a promotion, claiming the decision was influenced by the paper's "stated race and sex-based representation goals." A Times spokesperson called the allegations "politically motivated." The litigation follows Trump's $15 billion lawsuit against the Times and its reporters last fall.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration officials use shooting incident to advance ballroom construction and suppress criticism. — Within hours of the shooting, Trump administration officials and allied Republicans coordinated messaging to use the incident as justification for a contested White House ballroom construction project. Deputy White House Chief of Staff Dan Scavino attempted to lead a "USA! USA!" chant immediately after the shooting. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche sent a letter to the National Trust for Historic Preservation demanding dismissal of their lawsuit against the ballroom, stating the lawsuit "puts the lives of the president, his family, and his staff at grave risk." Multiple Republican lawmakers, including Rep. Chip Roy and Sen. John Fetterman, called for taxpayer funding of the ballroom. Trump held a press conference claiming the incident proved the need for the ballroom's "bulletproof glass" and "much more secure" design.
• Trump invokes shooting incident to press White House ballroom construction project — Following a shooting at the Washington Hilton during the White House Correspondents' Association dinner on Saturday night, President Trump used the incident to advance his controversial $400 million White House ballroom project. Trump claimed at a Saturday press briefing and in a Sunday Truth Social post that the incident demonstrated the need for a secure on-site ballroom, stating it would be "drone-proof" and "bulletproof." Trump also demanded on Sunday that lawsuits challenging the ballroom construction "must be dropped, immediately."
• DOJ demands National Trust drop White House ballroom lawsuit citing assassination attempt — Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the DOJ Civil Division sent a letter to the National Trust for Historic Preservation demanding the organization withdraw its lawsuit challenging Trump's planned ballroom on the site of the former White House East Wing. Shumate cited a shooting incident the previous night at the Washington Hilton during the White House Correspondents' Dinner, where a man carrying firearms and knives was apprehended by Secret Service. Shumate argued the ballroom is essential for presidential security and threatened to move to dissolve the injunction and dismiss the case if the lawsuit was not voluntarily dismissed by 9 a.m. Monday.
• Trump insisted security incident proved need for proposed ballroom — At a press conference hours after the April 26, 2026 security incident at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, Trump stated that the trouble demonstrated the necessity of his proposed ballroom addition to the White House.
• Department of Justice demanded National Trust for Historic Preservation drop lawsuit against Trump ballroom plans — On April 27, 2026, the Department of Justice sent a letter demanding that the National Trust for Historic Preservation withdraw its lawsuit challenging Trump's plans to construct a ballroom addition to the White House, arguing that the lawsuit "puts the lives of the President, his family, and his staff at grave risk." The National Trust rejected the demand, stating that while the security incident was "awful," Trump must still follow the law and obtain congressional approval for the ballroom.
• DOJ pressures National Trust for Historic Preservation to drop lawsuit against Trump ballroom project — Following a shooting at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner on April 26, the Department of Justice, through Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate, sent a letter to lawyers representing the National Trust for Historic Preservation demanding the organization voluntarily withdraw its lawsuit challenging Trump's $400 million White House ballroom construction project. The DOJ characterized the lawsuit as "frivolous" and argued the ballroom was essential for presidential security. The trust had previously obtained a preliminary injunction halting the project in March, but a three-judge appeals panel granted a stay allowing construction to resume on April 11.

Supporting reports

• Federal grand jury indicts Southern Poverty Law Center for wire fraud, false statements, and money laundering conspiracy — A federal grand jury in Montgomery, Alabama, returned an indictment charging the Southern Poverty Law Center with 11 counts of wire fraud, false statements to a federally insured bank, and conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering. The indictment alleges that between 2014 and 2023, the SPLC funneled more than $3 million in donated funds to individuals associated with violent extremist groups including the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, and National Socialist Party of America, while publicly claiming to oppose those groups. The DOJ alleges the organization used fictitious bank accounts to conceal the scheme and made false statements to financial institutions.
• Acting Attorney General Blanche announces 11-count indictment of Southern Poverty Law Center — Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche held a press conference announcing an 11-count federal indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center, charging the civil rights organization with wire fraud, making false statements to a bank, and conspiracy to launder money. The charges relate to a now-defunct program in which the SPLC paid informants to infiltrate extremist groups and shared information with law enforcement. Legal experts have characterized the charges as weak, and the SPLC has denied all wrongdoing. The indictment was widely viewed as an effort by Blanche to demonstrate to Trump his willingness to use the DOJ against political rivals.
• DOJ pressured prosecutors to indict Southern Poverty Law Center despite case-strength concerns, whistleblower alleges — A Department of Justice lawyer, Aakash Singh, reportedly pressured federal prosecutors in Alabama to rush an 11-count indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center despite serious concerns about the case's strength, according to a whistleblower account shared with House Democrats. Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the indictment on April 21, accusing the civil rights organization of wire fraud and money laundering related to an informant program. Democrats Jamie Raskin and Mary Gay Scanlon opened an investigation into the matter, citing Singh's directive to prosecutors to expedite charges. Legal experts have characterized the charges as weak, and the SPLC has denied all wrongdoing.
• Justice Department indicts Southern Poverty Law Center on federal fraud charges — Trump's Justice Department indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center on federal fraud charges, alleging the civil rights organization defrauded donors by secretly paying informants more than $3 million to infiltrate white supremacist and extremist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan. The tactic of using paid informants has been used by the FBI and other federal agencies for decades. Critics characterized the indictment as "nakedly political."
• DOJ indicts Southern Poverty Law Center on federal fraud charges — The Department of Justice, through Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, announced an 11-count federal indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) by an Alabama grand jury. The charges include wire fraud, bank fraud, and conspiracy to commit money laundering, alleging the SPLC funneled over $3 million to confidential informants within extremist groups between 2014 and 2023 using fictitious entities, and misrepresented to donors and banks how funds were being used. The SPLC's CEO Bryan Fair disputed the allegations and stated the informant program "saved lives."
• Southern Poverty Law Center indicted on federal fraud charges by Trump administration DOJ — The Southern Poverty Law Center was indicted on federal fraud charges by acting attorney general Todd Blanche, alleging the organization improperly paid informants to infiltrate extremist groups without disclosing payments to donors. The indictment claims at least $3 million went to informants affiliated with the KKK, Aryan Nations, and other groups between 2014 and 2023. SPLC CEO Bryan Fair stated the payments were necessary to monitor violence threats and that information was shared with the FBI and law enforcement. Charges include wire fraud, bank fraud, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
• DOJ indicted Southern Poverty Law Center for fraud — The Department of Justice indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center, alleging that SPLC used donor money to pay informants to infiltrate right-wing hate groups, but claiming the purpose was to create false flags to instigate violence and racist demonstrations. The indictment has refueled conspiracy theories that the January 6 insurrection was instigated by infiltrators paid by left-wing groups. Rep. Dan Goldman criticized the indictment as legally baseless, comparing it to prosecuting the FBI for funding drug trafficking through informants.

Supporting reports

• Kash Patel files $250 million defamation lawsuit against the Atlantic and reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick — FBI Director Kash Patel filed a defamation lawsuit in US District Court for the District of Columbia seeking $250 million in damages against the Atlantic magazine and reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick over an article published April 17 alleging excessive drinking and unexplained absences during his tenure. Patel's legal team claimed the article was a "malicious hit piece" relying on anonymous sources and accused the magazine of acting with actual malice. The Atlantic and Fitzpatrick have stated they stand by the reporting and will vigorously defend the lawsuit.
• Kash Patel filed $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic — FBI Director Kash Patel filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit in DC federal court against The Atlantic magazine over an article documenting multiple incidents of alleged intoxication while serving as FBI Director. The lawsuit challenges the article's use of anonymous sources and claims the publication engaged in a "deliberate and malicious smear." The article cited dozens of sources including current and former FBI officials, law-enforcement and intelligence agency staff, hospitality workers, members of Congress, and political operatives.
• FBI Director Kash Patel files $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic — FBI Director Kash Patel filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic magazine. The Atlantic stated it stands by its reporting. The lawsuit represents a high-stakes legal action by a law enforcement leader against a news organization over published reporting.
• Patel sues The Atlantic for $250 million defamation — FBI Director Kash Patel sued The Atlantic magazine and reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick on Monday for defamation, seeking $250 million in damages over a story published Friday alleging Patel engaged in excessive drinking, unexplained absences, and conduct that alarmed colleagues. The Atlantic's story was based on interviews with more than two dozen sources including current and former FBI officials, intelligence agency staff, and members of Congress, all speaking anonymously. Patel's complaint claims the article is "replete with false and obviously fabricated allegations" published with "actual malice," but legal analysis suggests his case faces significant obstacles under defamation law for public figures.
• FBI Director Kash Patel filed $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic — On April 21, Kash Patel sued The Atlantic and reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick for $250 million for publishing "a sweeping, malicious, and defamatory hit piece" full of "obviously fabricated allegations." The suit denies that Patel drinks to excess and claims this has never been a source of concern across government. The Atlantic stated it stands by its reporting and will vigorously defend against the lawsuit.
• — FBI Director Kash Patel filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic on April 21, 2026, in response to an article alleging he has alarmed colleagues with excessive drinking. Patel's complaint characterizes the article as "a sweeping, malicious, and defamatory hit piece." According to Popular Information, the complaint itself actually confirms several key aspects of The Atlantic's reporting, suggesting the lawsuit may be a strategic effort to intimidate press coverage of the FBI Director.

Supporting reports

• Trump, his sons, and Trump Organization sue IRS for $10 billion over tax document leak — President Donald Trump, his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, and the Trump Organization filed a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service seeking $10 billion in damages, claiming the agency was responsible for an IRS contractor's leak of Trump's tax documents to the press. The leaked documents showed Trump paid no income tax to the U.S. for fifteen of twenty years while paying approximately $200,000 in taxes to China. The lawsuit alleges the leak caused "reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment," and "unfairly tarnished their business reputations."
• Trump sued IRS and Treasury for $10 billion over tax record leaks — Donald Trump, his two eldest sons, and his family business sued the IRS and Treasury Department over alleged leaks of their confidential tax information. The plaintiffs seek at least $10 billion in damages in a civil complaint filed in Miami federal court. The lawsuit alleges the IRS and Treasury failed to prevent the leak of tax records by former IRS employee Charles Littlejohn in 2019 and 2020. Trump's legal team stated "The IRS wrongly allowed a rogue, politically-motivated employee to leak private and confidential information about President Trump, his family, and the Trump Org to the NYT, ProPublica and other left-wing news outlets." This is the second major lawsuit filed by Trump against the government where Attorney General Pam Bondi will decide whether to settle and for how much.

Supporting reports

• Claimed Civil Rights Act harmed white people — In a New York Times interview, Trump claimed that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 led to white people being "very badly treated."
• Trump announces expansion of defamation lawsuit against New York Times over unfavorable poll — President Donald Trump announced via Truth Social that he is expanding his existing defamation lawsuit against the New York Times to include claims related to a Times/Siena University poll showing his approval rating at 40%. Trump alleged the poll was "heavily skewed toward Democrats" and "fake results," and instructed his lawyers to demand the Times preserve records of how the poll was "computed." The Times responded by defending its polling methodology as rigorous and independent of political favorability.
• Trump threatened legal action against polling organizations over unfavorable poll — Following release of a New York Times/Siena poll showing Trump with 40% job approval and 56% disapproval across multiple policy areas, Trump posted three lengthy posts on Truth Social threatening to sue the Times and prosecute polling companies criminally. Trump claimed the polls were "fake" and "tremendously negative," and stated his lawyers had demanded the Times preserve records of how results were "computed."
• Trump delivers address at World Economic Forum in Davos with multiple false and exaggerated claims — Donald Trump addressed the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 22, 2026, making numerous claims about foreign policy achievements, technological leadership, renewable energy, NATO support, and budget matters. Fact-checkers found the claims ranged from exaggerated to provably false, including assertions about settling eight wars, leading China in AI, China's wind capacity, NATO allies' commitment, and the US ownership of Greenland. The speech exemplified a pattern of dubious assertions presented as fact to an international audience.
• Trump threatened to criminalize polling and sued New York Times — After the New York Times/Siena poll was released showing his approval at 40%, Trump's social media account posted that "Fake and Fraudulent Polling should be, virtually, a criminal offense" and claimed polls during the 2020 election were knowingly wrong and designed to influence the outcome. Trump announced he would add the Times/Siena poll to an existing lawsuit against the New York Times, threatening legal action against the news organization for publishing polling data.
• Trump threatened to sue New York Times over approval rating poll — Trump spent the morning lashing out at the press and threatened to sue The New York Times over its latest Siena poll, which shows his approval rating deeply underwater. Trump labeled the poll fake, accused the paper of fraud, and demanded internal records. The poll showed Trump with a net approval of minus sixteen and underwater on nearly every major issue, from the economy to foreign relations to immigration.
• Trump continues to repost conspiracy theories about 2020 election — Trump is still reposting conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, including content from QAnon-linked accounts. Many lawyers who pushed these lies lost their licenses, but the damage to the information environment remains.

Supporting reports

• Senator Slotkin said she is under federal investigation — Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) said in an interview that federal prosecutors are investigating her for participating in a video with other Democratic lawmakers calling on military members to refuse illegal orders.
• DOJ threatens Federal Reserve with criminal indictment over interest rate policy — Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell publicly stated that the Department of Justice threatened criminal charges against the Fed related to a multi-year renovation project of Federal Reserve office buildings. Powell characterized the threat as retaliation for the Fed's decision to set interest rates based on economic conditions rather than presidential preference, stating the threat was "a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President."
• Federal investigation opened against Michigan senator Elissa Slotkin for video urging troops to refuse illegal orders — Michigan senator Elissa Slotkin announced she is under federal investigation by the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia for her participation in a video released in 2025 in which she and five other Democratic lawmakers with military backgrounds urged U.S. troops to refuse unlawful orders. The video's message aligns with established military law and constitutional principle. President Trump called the video "seditious behavior by traitors" punishable by death; the White House later clarified he did not seek execution but wanted them "held accountable." Slotkin characterized the investigation as weaponization of federal government to intimidate political opponents.
• Senator Elissa Slotkin faces federal criminal investigation for oath video — Senator Elissa Slotkin is now under federal criminal investigation for appearing in a video urging service members to remember their oath and refuse illegal orders. The investigation represents potential criminalization of speech encouraging military personnel to uphold constitutional obligations and refuse unlawful commands.
• Four additional Democratic lawmakers said they are under investigation — Four additional Democratic lawmakers said they are being investigated by the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia over their participation in a viral video calling on military members to refuse illegal orders.
• Trump DOJ investigates Democratic lawmakers over military video on illegal orders — Three House Democrats—Jason Crow (Colorado), Maggie Goodlander (New Hampshire), and Chrissy Houlahan (Pennsylvania)—confirmed that the U.S. Attorney's Office for D.C., led by Jeanine Pirro, requested interviews regarding their participation in a November video instructing troops they need not comply with illegal orders. The investigation expands to five lawmakers total; the Pentagon also formally censured Senator Mark Kelly and launched administrative proceedings. Trump called the video "seditious" and threatened capital punishment, later walking back but maintaining the lawmakers face "serious jeopardy."

Supporting reports

• Pentagon launches investigation into Senator Mark Kelly — The Pentagon launched an investigation into Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) for "serious allegations of misconduct" in response to a viral video in which Kelly and five other Democratic lawmakers urged military members to refuse illegal orders. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called the video "despicable, reckless and false." Kelly responded that intimidation would not silence him.
• FBI Counterterrorism Division opened investigation into six lawmakers — By November 25, 2025, the FBI's Counterterrorism Division notified Congress it was opening an inquiry into the six veteran lawmakers and requested interviews with all six members. The investigation was triggered by their one-minute video reminding service members of their legal obligation to refuse illegal orders—a principle codified in U.S. military law since 1950 and rooted in post-World War II Nuremberg principles. Legal experts confirmed the lawmakers were simply restating existing law and that their statement does not constitute sedition.
• Pentagon announced investigation of Senator Kelly and signaled possible recall to active duty — The Pentagon announced it is investigating Senator Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain, and signaled it could recall him to active duty for possible court-martial over his participation in the video reminding troops of their legal obligation to refuse illegal orders. The threatened recall and court-martial of a sitting U.S. senator for restating military law represents an extraordinary use of military authority against a member of Congress.
• FBI contacts House and Senate regarding Democratic lawmakers' anti-Trump military video — The FBI contacted the House and Senate Sergeants at Arms requesting interviews with several Democratic members of Congress—Reps. Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander, Chris Deluzio, and Chrissy Houlahan, plus Sen. Elissa Slotkin—after they filmed a video urging military troops not to follow illegal orders. The lawmakers characterized the FBI outreach as intimidation and harassment, with Sen. Slotkin stating that the President is "weaponizing the federal government against his perceived enemies."
• FBI counterterrorism division investigates Democratic lawmakers — The FBI's counterterrorism division launched an investigation into six Democratic lawmakers who appeared in a viral video calling on military members to refuse illegal orders. Four House members stated that the FBI contacted the House and Senate sergeant at arms to set up interviews. They accused Trump of "using the FBI as a tool to intimidate and harass members of Congress."
• Far-right figures call for investigation and deportation of Arab-Americans — In the days following the November 18 rally, far-right figures including Tommy Robinson, Wall Street Apes, and Sidney Powell used the Dearborn incident to call on the Department of Justice to investigate and deport Arab-Americans. These calls amplified the rally's narrative of victimhood and framed an entire ethnic group as a threat requiring federal action.
• FBI contacts Capitol Police to schedule interviews with six Democratic senators — Fox News reported that the FBI contacted US Capitol Police to schedule interviews with the six Democratic senators who released the video advising military personnel to refuse illegal orders. The interviews appear to be part of the broader investigation into the lawmakers' statements.
• Pentagon launches investigation into Senator Mark Kelly for video advising troops to refuse illegal orders — The Pentagon announced an investigation into Senator Mark Kelly and five other Democratic lawmakers after they released a video advising military service members that they can refuse illegal orders and warning of "threats to our constitution" from within the administration. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called the video "despicable, reckless, and false." Trump characterized the senators' statement as "seditious behaviour" punishable by death. The Pentagon warned it could recall Kelly to active duty for court-martial under a federal law prohibiting military retirees from interfering with military discipline.

Supporting reports

• Trump directs FHFA head Pulte to publicly accuse Democratic opponents of mortgage fraud and demand Cook's resignation from Federal Reserve — Bill Pulte, appointed by Trump to lead the Federal Housing Finance Agency, has publicly accused New York Attorney General Letitia James, California Senator Adam Schiff, and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook of owner-occupancy mortgage fraud via social media and referrals to the Department of Justice. Trump has demanded Cook resign and threatened to fire her if she does not step down. Cook, the first Black woman appointed to the Fed, denies the allegations and states she will not be "bullied" into resigning. The accusations remain unverified.
• Sen. Adam Schiff accused Trump administration of mortgage-based political persecution — Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA), who is being criminally investigated after a referral from Bill Pulte, stated that the Trump administration's use of mortgage investigations against political opponents is "patently false" and that Pulte is "essentially doing the president's bidding." Schiff stated that "Mortgage is their new weapon to go after their critics" and that the administration will "manufacture anything to go after their critics."
• Trump administration weaponized Federal Housing Finance Agency against political opponents — The Wall Street Journal reported that the Trump administration weaponized the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to investigate mortgage records of political opponents. Bill Pulte, a homebuilder heir appointed to lead the agency overseeing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, initiated probes into mortgages of prominent Democrats and a Biden-appointed Federal Reserve official. Pulte partnered Fannie Mae with Palantir, a data analysis firm co-founded by Peter Thiel, and took an unusually active role at both firms.
• Bill Pulte weaponized Federal Housing Finance Agency to investigate Democrats for mortgage fraud — Bill Pulte, Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, weaponized the typically low-key, non-political agency to open investigations of Democrats for alleged mortgage fraud. Pulte made a criminal referral against Senator Adam Schiff and others, and provided the justification for Trump's attempted firing of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, citing mortgage fraud concerns. Pulte posted on social media that "fraud will not be tolerated in President Trump's housing market."

Supporting reports

• Five former Jan. 6 prosecutors called for investigation of interim US Attorney Ed Martin — Five former January 6 prosecutors signed a letter calling for an investigation of interim US Attorney for DC Ed Martin over the probes he opened into political opponents, for aiding defendants he previously represented, and for engaging in improper communication practices. The letter raises concerns about conflicts of interest and selective prosecution.

Supporting reports

• Michigan Governor Whitmer used as prop in Trump announcement — Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer was unexpectedly ushered into the Oval Office in front of cameras while Trump was announcing executive orders directing the DOJ to criminally investigate some of his former officials. Whitmer said she went to discuss Michigan-related issues but was used as a prop for the announcement. She attempted to cover her face as photos were taken, indicating she realized she had been manipulated.

Supporting reports

• Trump announces five major law firms agree to $600m pro bono work to avoid punitive executive orders — Donald Trump announced on Friday that five major law firms—Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, Allen Overy Shearman Sterling, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, and Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft—agreed to provide $600m in combined pro bono legal work to Trump-backed causes and adopt hiring practices that do not consider race, in exchange for avoiding executive orders punishing them. The EEOC agreed to withdraw a March 17 diversity inquiry letter. This brings Trump's total secured pro bono commitments from law firms to $940m.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration issues executive orders targeting law firms over representation of Trump opponents and prosecutors — The Trump administration issued executive orders against corporate law firms that either represented attorneys involved in prosecution efforts against Trump during the Biden presidency or represented the current administration's political opponents. Obama characterized this as an unprecedented use of executive power to punish legal representation based on political alignment.
• Law firms reach deals with Trump administration to avoid executive orders — Multiple prominent law firms—Willkie, Farr and Gallagher; Milbank LLP; and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom—capitulated to Trump's executive orders by reaching deals with the White House. In exchange for avoiding the orders, the firms agreed to perform pro bono work for causes aligned with Trump and to decline race-based hiring practices. This capitulation drew criticism from law firm alumni and Senator Bernie Sanders, who characterized it as "absolute cowardice" and a betrayal of professional independence.
• Trump administration issues executive orders targeting law firms representing political rivals — President Trump issued executive orders targeting law firms that had represented his political rivals. The orders sought to revoke security clearances, ban attorneys from accessing federal buildings, and require firms doing business with the government to disclose existing client relationships. The orders threatened to cripple targeted firms. Some firms capitulated and reached deals with the White House; others, including Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale, challenged the orders in court and secured injunctions or mandates blocking most of the measures.
• Trump executive orders target law firms for retribution; judges block orders on First Amendment and due process grounds — Trump issued executive orders targeting law firms Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale, seeking to revoke security clearances and curtail their government business. The orders targeted firms whose lawyers led a special counsel inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Three Washington DC judges in March blocked these orders. Judge John Bates called Trump's move "disturbing" and "troubling," noting it violated the firms' and lawyers' First Amendment and due process rights. Judge Beryl Howell temporarily blocked sanctions against Perkins Coie.
• Trump signs executive order targeting Susman Godfrey law firm — President Trump signed an executive order on April 9, 2025, targeting Susman Godfrey, the law firm that represented Dominion Voting Systems in its $787.5 million defamation settlement against Fox News over 2020 election falsehoods. The order restricts the firm's attorneys from accessing government buildings, revokes security clearances, and bars the firm from representing clients with federal business. Trump stated "there were some very bad things that happened with these law firms" without clarifying his rationale. Susman Godfrey announced it would challenge the order as unconstitutional.
• Trump issued executive order targeting law firm Susman Godfrey, suspending security clearances and restricting federal contracts — President Trump issued an executive order on April 9, 2025, directing federal agencies to suspend security clearances held by Susman Godfrey LLP employees, cease provision of government materials and services to the firm, review and terminate federal contracts involving the firm, and restrict official access and hiring of Susman employees. The order alleges the firm engages in activities undermining U.S. interests, including weaponizing the legal system, funding groups that undermine military effectiveness, and administering race-based employment programs.
• White House signed Executive Order 14263 targeting law firm Susman Godfrey with security clearance suspensions, contract terminations, and personnel restrictions. — The White House issued Executive Order 14263 on April 9, 2025, directing federal agencies to suspend security clearances held by Susman Godfrey LLP employees, terminate government contracts with the firm, require contractors to disclose business relationships with Susman, restrict employee access to federal buildings, and limit hiring of Susman staff. The order characterizes the firm as engaging in "weaponization" of the legal system, undermining military effectiveness, and racial discrimination. Agencies must submit assessments of affected contracts within 30 days.
• Trump executive order targeted law firm representing Dominion — Another executive order targets a law firm that represented Dominion Voting Systems Inc. in a lawsuit against Fox Corp. that resulted in the media company agreeing to pay a $787.5 million settlement. The firm is also involved in a defamation case against Trump supporter and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell.

Supporting reports

• Trump issues executive orders targeting Perkins Coie and Covington and Burling law firms — Trump issued executive orders targeting the law firms Perkins Coie and Covington and Burling, similar in structure to the Paul Weiss order. Perkins Coie was targeted over its ties to a lawyer who worked with Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign; Covington and Burling was targeted for representing former special counsel Jack Smith in litigation against the administration.
• Trump issues executive orders penalizing law firms Covington & Burling and Perkins Coie — President Trump issued executive orders targeting three major law firms—Covington & Burling, Perkins Coie, and Paul Weiss Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison—barring them from federal buildings, restricting agency interaction, and revoking security clearances from some lawyers. The orders were widely characterized as punitive retaliation against firms whose clients included former special counsel Jack Smith and Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign. District Judge Beryl Howell blocked enforcement against Perkins Coie on 12 March, citing First Amendment violations. Paul Weiss reversed the order on 19 March after agreeing to $40 million in pro bono services.
• Trump warned law firms to "behave themselves" — After the settlement with Paul Weiss, Trump warned that "law firms have to behave themselves." The warning signals that the administration will use executive power to target firms that do not comply with its preferences.
• Trump signed Executive Order 14246 suspending security clearances of Jenner & Block employees, restricting federal contracts, and limiting government access to the law firm. — President Trump issued Executive Order 14246 on March 25, 2025, targeting Jenner & Block LLP. The order directs the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence to suspend active security clearances held by firm employees pending review. It requires federal agencies to cease provision of government goods, property, and services to the firm. Agencies must review all contracts with Jenner & Block, terminate contracts where the firm provides services, require contractors to disclose business relationships with the firm, and restrict official access and engagement between federal employees and firm staff, including attorney Andrew Weissmann.
• Trump signs executive orders targeting law firms challenging his administration — President Trump signed multiple executive orders targeting major law firms (Jenner & Block, Covington and Burling, Perkins Coie, Paul Weiss) that have represented his political opponents or employed prosecutors involved in investigations into Trump. The orders threaten to revoke security clearances, deny access to government buildings, and require government clients to disclose representation by these firms. Trump also directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate lawyers blocking administration priorities. Paul Weiss capitulated and accepted Trump's demands; Perkins Coie obtained a temporary restraining order blocking its order.
• Trump issued executive order targeting law firm Jenner & Block, suspending security clearances and restricting federal contracts. — President Trump issued an executive order on March 25, 2025, directing federal agencies to suspend security clearances held by Jenner & Block LLP employees, cease provision of government goods and services to the firm, and review all federal contracts involving the firm for termination. The order alleges the firm engaged in "partisan lawfare," pro bono work undermining administration priorities, and employment discrimination. It specifically names attorney Andrew Weissmann and restricts federal employee engagement with firm staff.
• White House signed executive order targeting law firm Jenner & Block, directing suspension of security clearances and termination of federal contracts. — The White House issued an executive order on March 25, 2025, directing federal agencies to suspend security clearances held by Jenner & Block LLP employees, cease provision of government services and facilities to the firm, terminate federal contracts with the firm, and restrict official access and hiring of its employees. The order characterizes the firm as engaging in "partisan lawfare," pro bono activities deemed harmful to U.S. interests, and alleged racial discrimination. The order specifically names attorney Andrew Weissmann and directs agencies to submit compliance assessments within 30 days.
• Trump signed order targeting law firm with Mueller connection — Trump signed another executive order targeting a law firm that once employed Andrew Weissman, the former deputy to Robert Mueller, who investigated Russian interference in the 2016 election. The order suspends security clearances of the firm's employees, terminates government contracts, and orders a review of the firm's compliance with civil rights laws against racial bias.
• Trump administration stripped security clearances from law firms and barred attorneys from federal buildings — The Trump administration issued executive orders stripping security clearances from Perkins Coie and Paul, Weiss law firms and barring their attorneys from entering federal buildings, including courthouses. The chair of Paul, Weiss stated the move "could easily have destroyed our firm." The orders targeted firms representing Trump's opponents in litigation.
• Trump signed executive order encouraging disciplinary action against attorneys filing litigation against the administration — President Trump signed an executive order directing the attorney general to refer attorneys for disciplinary action if they file "frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious litigation" against the administration. Critics argue the order will have a chilling effect on litigation challenging government actions, and law firms have begun refusing to represent Trump's opponents out of fear of retaliation.
• Trump issues Executive Order 14250 suspending security clearances and restricting federal contracts with WilmerHale law firm — President Trump signed Executive Order 14250 directing the suspension of security clearances held by WilmerHale employees pending national-interest review, cessation of federal goods and services to the firm, termination of government contracts with WilmerHale, restrictions on federal building access for firm employees, and guidance against hiring WilmerHale staff. The order cites the firm's pro bono work, representation of immigration and voting-rights cases, and employment of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller as grounds for the action.
• Trump issued executive order targeting WilmerHale law firm with security clearance suspensions and federal contracting restrictions. — President Trump issued an executive order on March 27, 2025, directing federal agencies to suspend security clearances held by WilmerHale employees, cease provision of government goods and services to the firm, require federal contractors to disclose business relationships with WilmerHale, review and terminate relevant contracts, restrict WilmerHale employee access to federal buildings, and limit hiring of WilmerHale staff. The order cites the firm's pro bono work, representation of immigration and election-related cases, and employment of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller as grounds for the action.
• Trump signed Executive Order 14250 targeting WilmerHale law firm with security clearance suspensions, contract terminations, and personnel restrictions. — President Trump signed Executive Order 14250 on March 27, 2025, directing the suspension of security clearances held by WilmerHale employees pending review, cessation of government provision of materials and services to the firm, termination of federal contracts with WilmerHale, restrictions on federal employee access to WilmerHale staff, and limitations on hiring WilmerHale employees into government. The order characterizes the firm's pro bono work and representation of clients as threats to national security and American interests, and specifically names former Special Counsel Robert Mueller and colleagues as examples of "weaponization of government."
• Trump signed executive order suspending security clearances for WilmerHale employees and terminating federal contracts with the firm — President Trump signed an executive order on March 27, 2025, suspending security clearances held by WilmerHale employees pending review, halting federal material and services to the firm, restricting employee access to government buildings, terminating WilmerHale contracts, and barring federal agencies from hiring the firm's employees without authorization. The fact sheet characterizes WilmerHale as engaging in partisan activities, racial discrimination, and obstruction of immigration enforcement.
• Trump signed Executive Order 14253 directing removal of exhibits and narratives from federal museums and historical sites deemed ideologically divisive, with authority delegated to the Vice President over the Smithsonian Institution. — President Trump signed Executive Order 14253 on March 27, 2025, directing federal agencies to remove exhibits, programs, and historical narratives from museums and monuments that the order characterizes as "divisive" or promoting "ideology" rather than "objective facts." The order specifically targets the Smithsonian Institution, directing the Vice President to work through his role on the Smithsonian Board of Regents to remove what the order calls "improper ideology." It instructs the Secretary of the Interior to audit and reinstate pre-2020 monuments and ensure all federal historical sites focus on "greatness" and "achievements" rather than narratives the order deems disparaging. Future appropriations are to be conditioned on prohibiting exhibits that "divide Americans based on race" or are "inconsistent with Federal law and policy."
• Trump issues executive order directing federal agencies to remove "ideological" content from Smithsonian Institution and federal historical sites — President Trump signed an executive order on March 27, 2025, directing the Vice President, OMB Director, and Secretary of the Interior to remove what the order characterizes as "divisive, race-centered ideology" from the Smithsonian Institution, Independence National Historical Park, and other federal historical sites. The order mandates restoration of pre-2020 monuments and memorials, prohibits future federal funding for exhibits deemed to "degrade shared American values" or "divide Americans based on race," and requires the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum to exclude recognition of transgender athletes. The order frames this as restoring "truth" and "sanity" to American history.
• Trump administration issues executive orders targeting law firms; two firms sue to block — The Trump administration issued executive orders halting business with five law firms (Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, Paul Weiss, Covington & Burling, Perkins Coie) and revoking security clearances of their attorneys, citing retaliation for the firms' representation of political opponents or employment of Trump critics. On Friday, Jenner & Block and WilmerHale filed federal lawsuits in Washington DC seeking to block the orders as unconstitutional. Perkins Coie had already successfully convinced a judge to block its order. Paul Weiss and Skadden reached settlements with the administration to avoid or withdraw orders.

Supporting reports

• Executive Order on Paul Weiss Risks — President Donald J. Trump issued Executive Order 14237 to address risks associated with the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP. The order mandates a review of security clearances for individuals at Paul Weiss, cessation of government services to the firm, and a review of government contracts involving the firm. The order aims to prevent taxpayer funds from supporting activities deemed harmful to American interests, including racial discrimination and actions inconsistent with national security.
• Executive Order: Addressing Risks From Paul Weiss — President Donald Trump issued an executive order on March 14, 2025, targeting the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP. The order mandates a review and potential suspension of security clearances for individuals at the firm, citing national interest concerns. It also directs federal agencies to cease providing goods and services to Paul Weiss and to review and potentially terminate contracts with the firm. The order aims to prevent taxpayer dollars from supporting activities deemed inconsistent with American interests, including alleged racial discrimination and actions against national security.
• Trump signed executive order targeting law firm Paul Weiss with security clearance suspensions, contract terminations, and personnel restrictions. — President Trump signed an executive order on March 14, 2025, directing federal agencies to suspend security clearances held by Paul Weiss employees, terminate government contracts with the firm, restrict employee access to federal buildings, and limit hiring of firm personnel. The order cites the firm's representation of January 6 defendants, employment of former prosecutor Mark Pomerantz, and alleged racial discrimination in hiring. Agencies must submit compliance assessments within 30 days.
• White House issues fact sheet on executive order suspending security clearances for Paul Weiss law firm employees — The White House published a fact sheet stating that President Trump signed an executive order suspending security clearances held by employees of Paul Weiss law firm and attorney Mark Pomerantz, pending review of whether such clearances align with the national interest. The order directs the federal government to halt material and services to the firm, restrict building access, terminate contracts, and refrain from hiring its employees unless authorized. The fact sheet characterizes the firm's practices as warranting civil rights review under Title VII.