Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Preliminary injunction ruling — League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump (D. Mass.) 1:26-cv-11549 — Judge Talwani found that USPS Defendants violated the court's preliminary injunction related to “initiating or completing rulemaking to promulgate” specific regulations outlined in Section 3 of EO 14399 by sending a corresponding Final Rule to the Federal Register on Aug. 22, 2026. However, the court declined to impose a remedy “other than identifying the violation,” finding that the relief requested by Plaintiffs would not remedy the past violation but noting that Plaintiffs could choose to file an amended complaint.
• Democratic attorneys general from 23 states filed lawsuit challenging the USPS mail-in ballot rule — Democratic attorneys general from 23 states filed a new lawsuit Wednesday challenging the now-final USPS rule that allows the Postal Service to police mail-in ballot eligibility. The AGs sought an emergency block on the rule, with the first mail-in ballots set to go out the following week.
• Federal judge lifted the last remaining block on Trump's plan to give the Postal Service a new role in policing mail-in ballots — Judge Talwani granted Defendants' motion to reconsider and vacated the court's Aug. 11 preliminary injunction blocking Section 3 of EO 14399 following the Supreme Court's intervening stay of a separate preliminary injunction to Sections 2 and 3 of the same EO in a different but related case, Trump v. California . The vacatur is without prejudice to Plaintiffs amending their complaint. That same day, Plaintiffs filed a Supplemental Complaint adding claims directly challenging the USPS Aug. 21, 2026 Final Rule implementing Section 3 of EO 14399 as a separation-of-powers violation and as unlawful agency action exceeding USPS statutory authority under Title 39. Plaintiffs seek declaratory relief that the EO and Final Rules are unlawful and enjoinment of Defendants from continuing implementation of the Final Rule.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of California v. United States Postal Service (D. Mass.) 1:26-cv-13917 — A U.S. district judge reluctantly lifted the final injunction blocking Trump's plan to reshape how mail-in ballots are handled. The judge stated the Supreme Court ruling earlier in the week left her little choice. The new Postal Service rules could result in ballots being rejected from voters who do not appear on newly compiled federal eligibility lists. Democratic attorneys general from 23 states filed a new lawsuit Wednesday challenging the now-final USPS rule and seeking an emergency block before mail-in ballots begin going out the following week.
• USPS implements Trump executive order restricting mail-in ballot delivery — Judge Talwani granted in part Plaintiffs' emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO), staying implementation or enforcement of certain provisions of the USPS Final Rule for 14 days as to elections occurring on or before Nov. 3, 2026. The court found Plaintiffs likely to succeed on their claims that USPS lacked statutory authority to issue the Final Rule and that it is unconstitutional. The Court also found Plaintiff Organizations' members to be at risk of irreparable harm, facing a significant risk of disenfranchisement and interference with their rights under state laws. The Court is yet to rule on the Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Twenty-four states and DC file lawsuit challenging Trump mail-voting executive order — Judge Talwani granted in part Plaintiffs' emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO), staying implementation or enforcement of certain provisions of the USPS Final Rule for 14 days as to elections occurring on or before Nov. 3, 2026. The court found Plaintiffs likely to succeed on their claims that USPS lacked statutory authority to issue the Final Rule and that it is unconstitutional. The Court also found Plaintiff States face irreparable harm as “compliance [with the Final Rule's requirements] is practically impossible as to the 2026 midterm elections.” The Court is yet to rule on the Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction.
• U.S. District Judge Talwani temporarily blocked mail-voting restrictions — The US Postal Service announced implementation of new rules requiring the post office to withhold ballots for mail-in voting to voters deemed ineligible by Department of Homeland Security and other federal records. The rules stem from a Trump executive order issued earlier in 2026 and apply immediately to November's midterm elections. The US Supreme Court lifted a lower court injunction on Monday; US District Judge Indira Talwani lifted a nationwide block on Wednesday. Twenty-four states and DC filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging the order as usurping state and congressional authority over elections.
• US District Judge Talwani lifts nationwide block on USPS mail ballot rule — Twenty-four states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit on Wednesday to block the Trump executive order restricting mail-in voting in the 2026 midterm elections. The states argue the USPS policy is part of a broader effort by the administration to "rewrite federal election law and usurp the authority of the states and Congress."
• — Late Thursday, U.S. District Judge Talwani temporarily blocked the Postal Service from enforcing Trump's new mail-voting rule, one day after USPS announced the requirements took effect. The temporary block lasts 14 days while the court considers a longer preliminary injunction, with a hearing scheduled for September 3. The case could quickly return to the Supreme Court. As of Friday morning, Trump's new mail-ballot restrictions are currently blocked.
• — US District Judge Indira Talwani lifted her nationwide injunction blocking implementation of the USPS mail ballot delivery rule, citing the Supreme Court's decision to lift the lower court injunction. The ruling clears the way for the rule to take effect for November's midterm elections.

Supporting reports

• Georgia State Board of Elections subpoenas 2020 election records from Fulton County — The Georgia State Board of Elections, which has a Trump-aligned majority, issued a subpoena for 2020 election records from Fulton County at the urging of Trump and election denialists. Fulton County initially sought to quash the subpoena in court. In December, a Fulton County superior court judge ruled in the state board's favor, ordering the county to turn over records. County officials estimated the cost of producing the documents at $376,800 and had scheduled a February 9 meeting to discuss the transfer process before the FBI raid occurred.
• Senate Democrats and Republicans reach deal to split DHS funding bill and avert partial government shutdown — Senate Democrats and Republicans negotiated a deal to separate the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill from a broader spending package, with DHS funded for two weeks at current levels while other agencies receive funding through September. The split was driven by Democratic demands for reforms to federal immigration enforcement following deaths of US citizens in ICE operations. The House, out of session until Monday, must approve the revised package to prevent a weekend shutdown.
• Senate Democrats Force Separate Funding for DHS — Senate Democrats successfully separated funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from five other spending bills, allowing for a two-week negotiation period regarding the conditions of DHS funding. This decision was influenced by public outrage over recent violence by federal agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the U.S. Border Patrol. Democrats demanded accountability measures, including the use of body cameras and independent investigations into ICE operations. The Senate did not vote on the measure, and the House is currently out of session, leaving the fate of the funding uncertain.
• Senate passed appropriations bills with DHS funding pulled for longer discussion — The Senate passed appropriations bills to fund the government in 2026 with funding for the Department of Homeland Security pulled out for longer discussion. The bills now head to the House for consideration.
• Senate voted on Bernie Sanders amendment to repeal ICE funding increase — In the Senate, two Republicans joined all Senate Democrats to vote in favor of an amendment proposed by Bernie Sanders (I-VT) to repeal the $75 billion funding increase for ICE that Republicans included in their July 2025 "One Big Beautiful Bill Act." Sanders proposed using those savings to reverse cuts to Medicaid. The amendment failed 49 to 51, but the vote demonstrated significant Senate concern over ICE funding and conduct. Sanders stated: "As we speak, ICE agents are shooting American citizens in cold blood, breaking down doors to arrest people, and sending 5-year-olds to detention centers, all in clear violation of our Constitution. Instead of funding Trump's domestic army, we should instead use that money to prevent hundreds of thousands of Americans from losing the health care they desperately need by investing in Medicaid."

Supporting reports

• House Speaker Johnson refuses to swear in Representative-elect Grijalva — Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) was elected by voters on September 23, 2025, but House Speaker Mike Johnson has steadfastly refused to swear her into office. Grijalva has stated she will provide the final signature necessary on a discharge petition to force a vote on the public release of the Epstein files. Survivors of Epstein's sex trafficking enterprise sent a letter to Speaker Johnson on October 30 demanding that Grijalva be sworn in, stating that Johnson's refusal appears to be a deliberate attempt to block her participation in the discharge petition and obstruct transparency regarding Trump's connection to the Epstein files.

Supporting reports

• Arizona and Grijalva sue House of Representatives over refusal to swear in elected representative — The state of Arizona and representative-elect Adelita Grijalva filed suit against the House of Representatives over Speaker Johnson's refusal to swear Grijalva into office, thus depriving her Arizona constituents of representation. Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes argued that a duly elected representative who meets constitutional qualifications cannot be denied office simply because the Speaker has decided to keep the House out of regular session. Mayes requested the court authorize someone else to swear Grijalva into office.
• Arizona Attorney General and elected representative sue Speaker Johnson over obstruction of swearing-in — On October 21, 2025, Adelita Grijalva and Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes filed a lawsuit against the House of Representatives challenging Speaker Johnson's refusal to swear in Grijalva. The lawsuit argues that the Constitution does not authorize the Speaker to deny a duly elected representative her office to prevent her from signing a discharge petition or to strengthen the Speaker's negotiating position on budget matters. Mayes contends that Johnson "has not identified any valid reason for refusing to promptly seat Ms. Grijalva" and that the delay injures Grijalva and Arizona voters by denying representation for a significant portion of the two-year term. The lawsuit requests that if Johnson continues to delay, Grijalva be sworn in by another authorized official.
• Arizona sues Mike Johnson to block swearing-in of elected Democrat Adelita Grijalva — Arizona's Democratic attorney general Kris Mayes filed suit against House Speaker Mike Johnson to compel him to swear in Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat elected to Congress on 23 September in Arizona's seventh district. Johnson has refused to schedule her swearing-in since early October, citing the ongoing government shutdown. Grijalva cannot access her office fully or vote without being sworn in. The lawsuit alleges Johnson is denying Arizona's district representation and suspects he is blocking her to prevent her from becoming the 218th signature on a discharge petition to force a vote on releasing the Epstein files.

Supporting reports

• House Speaker Johnson refuses to seat elected representative Adelita Grijalva — House Speaker Mike Johnson has refused to seat representative-elect Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ), who was elected by voters on September 23, 2025, to fill a vacant House seat. Johnson has offered successive reasons to delay her seating. Without being sworn in, Grijalva has no access to government resources, cannot represent her constituents, and cannot provide the 218th signature needed on a discharge petition to force a vote on releasing the Epstein files.
• House adjourned for 77 of last 89 days to block Epstein files release vote — Speaker Mike Johnson kept the House adjourned for 77 of the previous 89 days, with House Republicans working only 12 days in three months. The stated purpose was to prevent a vote on releasing the Epstein files. Rep. Marjorie Greene publicly disagreed with the shutdown strategy, calling for the House to return to work on appropriations and legislation.
• House Speaker Johnson refuses to call House into session, blocking swearing-in of representative-elect Grijalva — House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is refusing to call the House into session, keeping members out of Washington and preventing the swearing-in of representative-elect Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ), who was elected on September 23. Johnson claims that keeping the House out of session prevents him from swearing in Grijalva, though speakers have sworn in representatives during pro forma sessions in the past. Grijalva has stated she will be the 218th signature on a discharge petition to force a vote on releasing the Epstein files.
• Johnson dismisses Grijalva lawsuit as "absurd" and "publicity stunt" — House Speaker Mike Johnson responded to the Arizona lawsuit by calling it "absurd" and characterizing it as "a publicity stunt." The lawsuit had noted that Johnson's excuse for delaying Grijalva's swearing-in—that former Speaker Nancy Pelosi delayed swearing in Representative Julia Letlow—was inaccurate; Pelosi had contacted Letlow to determine when she wished to be sworn in.
• Arizona sued House Speaker Mike Johnson to compel swearing-in of Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva — Arizona sued House Speaker Mike Johnson and the U.S. House of Representatives to compel the swearing-in of Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva, who won a special election last month. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes argued the delay violates the constitutional rights of the district's 800,000 residents to representation. Democrats said the delay is politically motivated, as seating Grijalva could give Democrats the 218th signature needed for a discharge petition to force a vote for the release of Jeffrey Epstein-related documents.
• Arizona and Grijalva sue House of Representatives over refusal to swear in elected representative — The state of Arizona and representative-elect Adelita Grijalva filed suit against the House of Representatives over Speaker Johnson's refusal to swear Grijalva into office, thus depriving her Arizona constituents of representation. Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes argued that a duly elected representative who meets constitutional qualifications cannot be denied office simply because the Speaker has decided to keep the House out of regular session. Mayes requested the court authorize someone else to swear Grijalva into office.
• Arizona Attorney General and elected representative sue Speaker Johnson over obstruction of swearing-in — On October 21, 2025, Adelita Grijalva and Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes filed a lawsuit against the House of Representatives challenging Speaker Johnson's refusal to swear in Grijalva. The lawsuit argues that the Constitution does not authorize the Speaker to deny a duly elected representative her office to prevent her from signing a discharge petition or to strengthen the Speaker's negotiating position on budget matters. Mayes contends that Johnson "has not identified any valid reason for refusing to promptly seat Ms. Grijalva" and that the delay injures Grijalva and Arizona voters by denying representation for a significant portion of the two-year term. The lawsuit requests that if Johnson continues to delay, Grijalva be sworn in by another authorized official.
• House Republican leadership claims Trump exonerated in Epstein files — House Republican leadership, represented by Rep. James Comer, claimed that evidence gathered does not implicate President Trump in any way regarding the Epstein files. Comer stated that public reporting, survivor testimony, and official documents show Bill Clinton had far closer ties to Epstein. The files remain unreleased to the public.
• Arizona sues Mike Johnson to block swearing-in of elected Democrat Adelita Grijalva — Arizona's Democratic attorney general Kris Mayes filed suit against House Speaker Mike Johnson to compel him to swear in Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat elected to Congress on 23 September in Arizona's seventh district. Johnson has refused to schedule her swearing-in since early October, citing the ongoing government shutdown. Grijalva cannot access her office fully or vote without being sworn in. The lawsuit alleges Johnson is denying Arizona's district representation and suspects he is blocking her to prevent her from becoming the 218th signature on a discharge petition to force a vote on releasing the Epstein files.
• Rep.-elect Grijalva blocked from being sworn in — Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva has been blocked from being sworn in by Speaker Mike Johnson, an unprecedented move that prevents her from voting on critical legislation.